Politics & Policy

Judge This

A strong 6-3 majority of the U.S. Supreme Court upheld an Indiana voter-identification law in a decision handed down Monday. The decision in Crawford v. Marion County Election Board underscores the importance of nominating conservative justices who understand the importance of judicial restraint. More than half of the states have passed laws requiring the presentation of some form of identification in order to vote. It is easy to imagine a more activist court overturning those democratically enacted laws based on a few liberal groups’ spurious claims of democracy denied.

Opponents of the law argued that there was no evidence of in-person voter fraud in Indiana and insufficient evidence of in-person voter fraud in other states to justify a law requiring the presentation of photo ID. They pointed to the partisan origins of Indiana’s law (it passed through a Republican-controlled state legislature on a party-line vote) as evidence of their preferred hypothesis: Republicans favor the law, critics said, because it discourages Democrat-leaning constituencies from voting.

While it’s true that Justice John Paul Stevens cited little evidence of in-person voter fraud in his lead opinion, examples abound. John Fund, author of Stealing Elections: How Voter Fraud Threatens Our Democracy, has reported several instances from the recent past in which the evidence for in-person voter fraud was clear, but in which prosecutors failed to obtain indictments. Voter impersonation is hard to detect and even harder to prosecute. Indiana’s law requiring ID at the polls serves a legitimate public interest by making it more difficult to commit this crime.

Contrary to the critics’ claims, the law does not unduly burden any Indiana voters. Justice Stevens, one of the court’s more liberal members, noted that it lacked the burdensome characteristics of a poll tax because Indiana ID cards are free. He also pointed out that “the inconvenience of going to the Bureau of Motor Vehicles, gathering required documents, and posing for a photograph does not qualify as a substantial burden on most voters’ right to vote, or represent a significant increase over the usual burdens of voting.” What’s more, he wrote, voters who show up to the polls without an ID may cast a provisional ballot, then visit the county clerk’s office within ten days to produce an ID or sign an affidavit to have their vote counted.

It is rare that we agree with Justice Stevens, but in this case we find his argument convincing — though we like Justice Antonin Scalia’s concurring opinion even better. Justice Scalia, joined by Justices Thomas and Alito, stated plainly that “the burden at issue is minimal and justified.” Justice Stevens, joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Anthony Kennedy, agreed that the law’s opponents had not produced anyone whom the law would unduly burden, but argued that such people might, in theory, exist. We prefer Scalia’s approach because it closes the door on further challenges to the law in this vein.

The law’s opponents could not produce evidence of a special burden for a simple reason: No one who is legally allowed to vote in Indiana should have major problems complying. Justices David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer dissented from that view, but we find their examples — such as the theoretical voter who, sans ID, can make it to the voting booth on Election Day but not to the county clerk’s office a few days later — far-fetched. The dissenters pointed out that 32 of the 34 ID-less voters who cast provisional ballots in Indianapolis’s 2006 mayoral election didn’t make the second trip to sign the affidavit. But just because they didn’t, doesn’t mean they couldn’t.

It should be noted that Barack Obama was prominent among the liberals asking the Supreme Court to overturn a democratically enacted law in the name of protecting democracy. He has been a fierce critic of voter-ID laws, and he wasted no time condemning Monday’s decision, arguing that Indiana’s law “places an unfair burden on Indiana residents who are poor, elderly, disabled, or members of minority groups.” All this over something as simple as showing a driver’s license to prevent voter fraud. Talk about the soft bigotry of low expectations.

Most Popular

Books

Jordan Peterson v. the Publishing Mob

Staff at Penguin Random House Canada have “confronted management” about the decision to publish Jordan Peterson’s book in an “emotional town hall,” Vice reports. Peterson’s Beyond Order: 12 More Rules for Life will be released in March 2021. Apparently, one “junior employee who is a member of the ... Read More
Books

Jordan Peterson v. the Publishing Mob

Staff at Penguin Random House Canada have “confronted management” about the decision to publish Jordan Peterson’s book in an “emotional town hall,” Vice reports. Peterson’s Beyond Order: 12 More Rules for Life will be released in March 2021. Apparently, one “junior employee who is a member of the ... Read More
Elections

To ‘Steal’ an Election

Dan has a good article on the homepage, the main point of which is that the system worked, since Trump’s efforts to reverse the election failed. Certainly I agree with him about that. But he also finds charges that Trump tried to “steal” the election “overheated.” Since I made such a claim myself, I ... Read More
Elections

To ‘Steal’ an Election

Dan has a good article on the homepage, the main point of which is that the system worked, since Trump’s efforts to reverse the election failed. Certainly I agree with him about that. But he also finds charges that Trump tried to “steal” the election “overheated.” Since I made such a claim myself, I ... Read More
Elections

It’s Only ‘Free and Fair’ When We Win

Indeed, this is astonishing: https://twitter.com/felixsalmon/status/1331295033325219840 In 2018, after two years of media spinning tales about shady Russian infiltrators in our government, 67 percent of Democrats believed that Putin’s gremlins had bored into our voting machines and altered the outcome ... Read More
Elections

It’s Only ‘Free and Fair’ When We Win

Indeed, this is astonishing: https://twitter.com/felixsalmon/status/1331295033325219840 In 2018, after two years of media spinning tales about shady Russian infiltrators in our government, 67 percent of Democrats believed that Putin’s gremlins had bored into our voting machines and altered the outcome ... Read More

The Coup That Wasn’t

Donald Trump is not done challenging the results of the 2020 election in court, and he is by no means done complaining. But there will be no “coup.” Any prospect of Trump remaining in office without a legal process that declares him the recipient of more legal votes in the decisive states has now evaporated. ... Read More

The Coup That Wasn’t

Donald Trump is not done challenging the results of the 2020 election in court, and he is by no means done complaining. But there will be no “coup.” Any prospect of Trump remaining in office without a legal process that declares him the recipient of more legal votes in the decisive states has now evaporated. ... Read More
Film & TV

Hillbilly Elegy: Ron Howard’s Inverted Mayberry

Hollywood knows two registers when it comes to the white working class (WWC): sentimentalizing and condescending. WWCs are either cute, neighborly, and folksy, or they constitute a tawdry, alien life form. There are 130 million WWCs in our country, and yet nobody in Hollywood has the slightest grasp of them. With ... Read More
Film & TV

Hillbilly Elegy: Ron Howard’s Inverted Mayberry

Hollywood knows two registers when it comes to the white working class (WWC): sentimentalizing and condescending. WWCs are either cute, neighborly, and folksy, or they constitute a tawdry, alien life form. There are 130 million WWCs in our country, and yet nobody in Hollywood has the slightest grasp of them. With ... Read More
Elections

About That ‘Broken Algorithm’

Of all the loopy assertions made at the press conference President Trump’s legal team conducted last Thursday, the one that has been most roundly derided is the since-ousted Sidney Powell’s claim that the national popular vote was such a landslide for President Trump “that it broke the algorithm that had ... Read More
Elections

About That ‘Broken Algorithm’

Of all the loopy assertions made at the press conference President Trump’s legal team conducted last Thursday, the one that has been most roundly derided is the since-ousted Sidney Powell’s claim that the national popular vote was such a landslide for President Trump “that it broke the algorithm that had ... Read More