70,000 valid Native American IDs made invalid for voting, SCOTUS approves

They want to be? They were here before us…such entitlement…

Meh…I guess to be fair, if judges hadn’t been held up by the Republicans during the Obama administration, maybe this wouldn’t have taken 5 1/2 years to be fixed, right?

Either way, the ID’s were allowed until right before what is going to be a close election. Nothing sketchy about that, right?

Any evidence that lack of judges help up the timing of the court cases?

No. Once the supreme court said no to an emergency appeal might mean the case is over in which case the law should go into effect. (or it might be stalled out for over a year – I’m not sure).

It’s not sketchy because it favors you…just cut through the ■■■■■■■■■

Nothing specific, but it seems pretty fair to assume that if a case is backlogged for 2 years, it might have something to do with workload for the judges hearing the cases being a bit larger than they can handle, isn’t it?

State courts said no…the Supreme Court didn’t rule until recently. The injunction was in place until then.

Ironically, I’m not even arguing the end result, per se. I simply asked why when it came to air travel, a 6 month grace period was given to make things right, but in the case of the right to vote, its immediate. And spare me the whole “they have had years to get a new ID” line of reasoning, as there was a chance they wouldn’t have to. The vast majority of people don’t do things unless they have no choice…why this should be held to any different standard is the question.

What are they afraid of?

Because we know why…he just wont come out and state why.

Their ID was used and acceptable for the recent primary election

:rofl: good one.

Everything happens before an election. If it had happened on Nov 9 instead of October 9, it would be before the next election.

And isn’t every election “the most important of our times”?

So now this election will be claimed to be “rigged”. When was the last election that someone didn’t claim it was rigged?

Nothing new under the sun.

Seems to me that this should be a lesson to those in other areas that are trying to institute voter-ID rules. People should start now to get an ID that will be valid if/when the rules go into effect rather than waiting until the last minute and claiming they were blindsided by an unfair law.

Yes and that was before the supreme court denied an emergency appeal. Many courts put their rullings on hold to allow time to appeal. Don’t know if that was the case here.

You do know the difference between “before an election” and “right before an election”, dont you?

You are correct…if the decision happens on Nov. 9 to be in place before the NEXT election cycle, everyone then has the entire time to get right.

Having it happen on Oct. 9 is just shady as hell, and somehow, I think we both know it.

More like States Rights in your face! North Dakota has a right to require a valid ID proving legal residence. The ND State Legislature passed a law that a “current residential street address” or other supplemental documentation that provides proof of such an address is mandatory to vote.

So this is just a conspiracy theory, that the state legislators did this purposely to harm the Native American and homeless person voting population?

Couldn’t it just be another example of a state government law has inadvertently screwed something up?

70,000? According to this link, there are:

In total, there are 31,329 American Indians living in North Dakota, making up 4.9% of the total population.

The decision happened in 2012. They had plenty of time to react.

I’ll repeat my take on this issue:

Seems to me that this should be a lesson to those in other areas that are trying to institute voter-ID rules. People should start now to get an ID that will be valid if/when the rules go into effect rather than waiting until the last minute and claiming they were blindsided by an unfair law.

Perhaps they would get 70K votes without an ID law?

1 Like

The decision was placed on hold in 2016.

From the time of the original decision to recently, the original IDs were to be considered valid. Had the decision gone the other way, they still would be.

As I stated earlier, Im not even disputing the decision itself, as Im kinda leaning to agree with it…Im questioning the timing and why they didnt make it effective for the next election cycle.

It’s not an ID, if it has no bio tracer like a finger print.

SCOTUS (nor the other courts) can’t dictate implementation of a state law. It can only rule on the constitutionality of the law.

Cases come up in the schedule when they come up. You’d have a better argument if you had evidence that this one was accelerated on the calendar to create this timing.

1 Like

Yup.

Rather than adapting their ideas and platform, they’re just abandoning democracy. Win at all costs, even if it means taking a dump on our election process.