|
| quote: | Originally posted by jerZ07002
no shit!!!
i'm not familiar with that test, however, since citizens are required by law to procure identification (for other reasons), it can't be a burden on voting since you don't need to procure the license solely for voting. said differently, procuring the license is not equivalent to a poll tax. I think of requiring an ID to vote more along the lines of requiring voters to wear clothing to the polls. i'm pretty sure that would withstand a constitutional challenge even though the clothes must be procured by the voter. |
Well, we're both considering the voting population in general. The Anderson Balancing Test is used to determine whether an undue burden is put on even one voter's right to vote. Since the right to participate freely in democratic elections is considered a fundamental right of all citizens, the magnitude of the infringement is more or less irrelevant - if it infringes in any way on the ability of even a small population to participate, it can be deemed unconstitutional.
I'm more or less neutral on the issue - the number of people affected is admittedly very small.
However, the dissenting opinion (Breyer) in the recent Supreme Court case was intriguing:
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/07pdf/07-21.pdf
___________________
|