Victory for Voter Photo ID

This is good news.

The Supreme Court ruled today that states may require voters to present photo identification before casting ballots, upholding a Republican-backed measure that proponents say combats voter fraud and opponents believe discourages voter participation.

The court ruled 6-3 that the requirements enacted by Indiana's legislature were not enough of a burden to invoke constitutional protections. Because the state's law is generally regarded as the nation's strictest, the ruling bodes well for other states that have required photo ID.

"The application of the statute to the vast majority of Indiana voters is amply justified by the valid interest in protecting the integrity and reliability of the electoral process," Justice John Paul Stevens wrote. He was joined by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justice Anthony M. Kennedy.

Three conservative justices -- Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr. -- agreed with the outcome but would have made it even more difficult for voters in states with photo-identification laws to challenge them.

Three liberal justices -- David H. Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen G. Breyer -- dissented.

...When the law was upheld by a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit, the dissenting Democratic-appointed judge called it a "not-too-thinly veiled attempt" to discourage voters who skew Democratic.

Stevens noted that it was "fair" to infer that "partisan considerations may have played a significant role" in Indiana's decision to pass the law.

"But if a nondiscriminatory law is supported by valid neutral justifications, those justifications should not be disregarded simply because partisan interests may have provided one motivation for the votes of individual legislators," he wrote.

Excellent point.

This ruling can only help Wisconsin's effort to pass a voter photo ID law.

From the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:

"Everything we have been calling for is constitutional," said Rep. Jeff Stone (R-Greendale), who has long pushed for a voter ID law in Wisconsin.

...Since taking office in 2003, Democratic Gov. Jim Doyle has vetoed bills three times that would have required voters to show photo ID at the polls, saying it would disenfranchise poor and elderly voters. Republicans frustrated by the vetoes moved to amend the state constitution, which does not require the governor's approval.

But that move was stalled last year, when Democrats took over the state Senate. To amend the constitution, a resolution must be approved by lawmakers in two consecutive legislative sessions and then by voters in a statewide referendum.

Lawmakers gave initial approval to the resolution in 2006, when Republicans controlled both houses.

But Senate Democrats refused to take up the measure again in the latest legislative session. The Senate is not expected to address the matter before the November elections, meaning that the entire process would have to start over again in January.

"It's time for the Senate to allow the people of Wisconsin to have a voice on this," Stone said. "The real question is why the Senate doesn't want to allow for clean, fair and accurate elections in Wisconsin."

Parisi said voter fraud it isn't as common as photo ID supporters claim it is, and that part of maintaining election integrity involves making it possible for as many people who are eligible to cast ballots.

The Dems should give up on blocking a measure that will help assure the integrity of elections in Wisconsin.

In national elections, Wisconsin will become a fraud magnent if the Dems don't back off.

Since it's unlikely that Doyle and his minions will change their minds because they strongly prefer to look out for their political self-interest than worry about disenfranchising Wisconsin voters via fraud, I think it would be wise to follow Stone's suggestion: Let the people of Wisconsin decide.