• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

USDOJ vs Georgia

Help Support Ranchers.net:


Well-known member
Feb 10, 2005
Reaction score
Montgomery, Al
Still can't understand how showing an ID to vote is discriminatory????????

U.S. Department of Justice Rejects Georgia's Voter Verification System

February 25, 2010 | by LWV


Contact: Kelly Ceballos

February 25, 2010


League of Women Voters of Georgia and League of Women Voters of the United States Applaud the Action

Washington, DC - The League of Women Voters of Georgia and the League of Women Voters of the United States (LWVGA & LWVUS) applaud the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) decision to reject the Georgia law that requires citizens to show photo identification in order to vote. The decision by DOJ reinforces the need for the State of Georgia to demonstrate that the voter registration verification program they want to institute has neither a discriminatory purpose nor a discriminatory effect.

Georgia’s State Legislature enacted SB 86 in 2009, which was to go into effect on January 1, 2010. Since the state is required under federal law to meet the requirements of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, any laws or action instituted must be reviewed and approved by DOJ.

“Voting is a fundamental right in our democracy, and we applaud the U. S. Department of Justice for working to ensure access to full participation is not restricted,” said Mary G. Wilson, president of the League of Women Voters of the U.S. “Enforcement of the federal Voting Rights Act by DOJ will stop efforts to disenfranchise eligible voters from participating in the democratic process and protect citizens.”

“This decision shows that U.S. Department of Justice agrees that the state of Georgia has a problem with ensuring access and has jeopardized the voting rights of its citizens. The focus of Georgia’s Secretary of State should be on access and not suppression of voting,” said Tracey Nelson, Executive Director of LWVGA.

Nelson also added, “The right to vote - and to have your vote counted - is the most important civil right we have. Photo ID requirements are one of the greatest threats to fair and equal voting rights today. The government should be in the business of encouraging full participation of our citizenry, not developing ways to limit the right to vote.”

“The League of Women Voters will continue to fight against barriers to voting and work to ensure that all citizens have fair and equal access to the polls,” concluded Nelson.


Well-known member
Nov 12, 2006
Reaction score
Obama can't get elected if real voters are the only ones counted :roll:


Well-known member
Feb 13, 2005
Reaction score
Wildwood New Jersey
maybe they could get a constitutional scholar to explain the court rulings to the DOJ ..

4/28/2008 Supreme Court upholds voter ID law

Stevens: Law justified to protect integrity, reliability of electoral process

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court ruled Monday that states can require voters to produce photo identification without violating their constitutional rights, validating Republican-inspired voter ID laws.

In a splintered 6-3 ruling, the court upheld Indiana's strict photo ID requirement, which Democrats and civil rights groups said would deter poor, older and minority voters from casting ballots. Its backers said it was needed to prevent fraud.

The law "is amply justified by the valid interest in protecting 'the integrity and reliability of the electoral process,'" Justice John Paul Stevens said in an opinion that was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Anthony Kennedy.

Justices Samuel Alito, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas also agreed with the outcome, but wrote separately.

Justices Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and David Souter dissented,

More than 20 states require some form of identification at the polls. Courts have upheld voter ID laws in Arizona, Georgia and Michigan. Monday's decision comes a week before Indiana's presidential primary.

The decision also could spur efforts to pass similar laws in other states.

The case concerned a state law, passed in 2005, that was backed by Republicans as a way to deter voter fraud. Democrats and civil rights groups opposed the law as unconstitutional and called it a thinly veiled effort to discourage elderly, poor and minority voters — those most likely to lack proper ID and who tend to vote for Democrats.

Burden 'eminently reasonable'
"We cannot conclude that the statute imposes 'excessively burdensome requirements' on any class of voters," Stevens said.

Indiana provides IDs free of charge to the poor and allows voters who lack photo ID to cast a provisional ballot and then show up within 10 days at their county courthouse to produce identification or otherwise attest to their identity.

Stevens said these provisions also help reduce the burden on people who lack driver licenses.

looks like that about covers it... .

Latest posts