Moultrie Products
North Dakota voter ID law remains!
Community
Contributors to this thread:
Spike Bull 10-Oct-18
JTV 10-Oct-18
MK111 10-Oct-18
Your fav poster 10-Oct-18
Trax 10-Oct-18
JTV 10-Oct-18
JL 10-Oct-18
JTV 10-Oct-18
Annony Mouse 10-Oct-18
Woods Walker 14-Oct-18
IdyllwildArcher 14-Oct-18
t-roy 14-Oct-18
Pete In Fairbanks 14-Oct-18
Woods Walker 14-Oct-18
10-Oct-18

Spike Bull 's Link
Another state where right prevails!

http://www.redstate.com/streiff/2018/10/09/breaking.-supreme-court-uphold-north-dakotas-voter-id-law

From: JTV
10-Oct-18
Good for them ..... more need to follow suit .....

From: MK111
10-Oct-18
Why not!

10-Oct-18
great. So let’s make it harder for Native Americans to vote. By Requiring street address when many of them use P.O. Boxes in rural areas. This is Nothing more than voter suppression by the GOP.

From: Trax
10-Oct-18
Once again, Paul Zeidan proves himself to be an ignorant tape worm! He proves it all by himself! The classic blind dumb sheep liberal mantra, that requiring simple common sense voter ID will suppress anyone from voting. It is a complete lie, but the pathologically stupid buy it by the manure load. Get off your lazy dumb azz and get a free ID card with an address and vote. NOBODY is suppressed.

From: JTV
10-Oct-18
PutZ is out of his league once again .... oh those poor little Indians living in their Tee Pee's, how will they vote ?? .... poor wittle papooses ... ROFLMAO !! ........ another falsehood put up by the left .. btw, what PutZ put down was a fart (talking point) that CNN had used when this news came out, that is 'prolly where he got that crap from ....just another lefty sheep, spouting nonsense ...

From: JL
10-Oct-18

JL's Link
Alot of folks live in rural areas with just PO Boxes.....not just the Indians. There is a fix in the bill for this. The last paragraph in the below article spells out the easy fix. Idiots like Eric Holder should stay in their big city and shut up.

Here is the rest of the story.....

Supreme Court rules 6-2 in favor of ND’s voter ID law

Barry Amundson Forum News Service 22 hrs ago

The U.S. Supreme Court has now waded into North Dakota election law.

The high court on Tuesday, responding to an emergency appeal, released a decision on a 6-2 vote that will allow the state to require a residential address on a driver’s license or ID card to vote and won’t accept a post office box except with supplemental proof of a residential address.

The issue has been lingering since the 2017 state Legislature approved a change in the voting law.

Originally, U.S. District Court Judge Daniel Hovland of Bismarck ruled in the case that the state must accept IDs and supplemental documentation with a current mailing address, which allowed the post office box to be used.

However, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals on Sept. 24 granted a stay on that decision, which was then appealed to the nation’s highest court.

In the Tuesday ruling, the Supreme Court then upheld the stay, rejecting the emergency appeal by attorneys representing a group of Native Americans in the state challenging North Dakota’s voter ID law.

Justice Neil Gorsuch was responsible for the appeal and a majority opinion on why the North Dakota law should stand for now wasn’t written by the high court. It was also noted that Judge Brett Kavanaugh didn’t participate in the decision.

However, two justices, Elena Kagan and Ruth Bader Ginsburg, dissented.

Ginsburg, in writing the dissent, said the decision could result in “voter confusion” and an “incentive to remain away from the polls.”

“The risk of voter confusion appears severe here because the injunction against requiring residential address identification was in force during the primary election and because the Secretary of State’s website announced for months the ID requirements” as they previously existed.

Ginsburg noted that the appeals court said voters have a month to “adapt” to the new requirement.

However, she wrote that Hovland in his ruling said that 70,000 state residents lack a qualifying ID and about 18,000 residents also lack supplemental documentation sufficient to permit them to vote.

Ginsburg then re-emphasized that the decision could result in “the all too real risk of grand-scale voter confusion.”

The Native American Rights Fund, which represented the tribal members, said in an earlier release in appealing to the Supreme Court that “several thousand will be unable to vote in this year’s election simply because they do not have a residential address or because they lack the documentation and/or funds to obtain the required voter identification.”

However, Secretary of State Al Jaeger said in an phone interview Tuesday that he was pleased with the decision.

He emphasized that using only a post office box did not establish the residential address of the voter.

Thus, he said, it could lead voters to the wrong precinct polling place if they had only a post office box.

He said that it’s not only a problem with some Native Americans who only have post office boxes on their tribal IDs. As another example, he said it could be an oil field worker who only had a post office box in the state on his ID. Or, in another case that has arisen, the oil field worker might also only have a Texas driver’s license and thus couldn’t vote.

Also, Jaeger said he and Attorney General Wayne Stenehjem, who helped defend the state law, disagree with Hovland’s “characterization” about the number of state residents that lack a qualifying ID.

“Based on evidence we have from the polls, 97 percent to 98 percent of voters have acceptable IDs when they show up,” Jaeger said.

According to Jaeger, voters whose state-issued ID does not contain their current address do not have to obtain a replacement card. However, he said they must update their residential address with the Department of Transportation at www.dot.nd.gov or by calling 701-328-4353. The address change will then be updated in the state’s central voter file and then in the poll books used at precinct polling locations, Jaeger said.

As for those with only a post office box on their license or ID card, including tribal or U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs identification, Jaeger said they can vote if they provide a residential address with a current utility bill, bank statement, paycheck or any other document with a current address and date of birth.

From: JTV
10-Oct-18
ooopsie ..

"As for those with only a post office box on their license or ID card, including tribal or U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs identification, Jaeger said they can vote if they provide a residential address with a current utility bill, bank statement, paycheck or any other document with a current address and date of birth."

From: Annony Mouse
10-Oct-18
Putzie...your lack of intelligence is amazing.

There is a BIG difference between a PO Box address and a physical address. I have had a PO Box for over 30 years...it is in a different county and voting district than my home residence, where I vote. There is NO problem registering to vote under these circumstances. I actually get my absentee ballot at my PO Box with no problems.

Further, my street address is actually in a different county than my residence (I live on the county line)...yet there is no problem for me to vote in my "proper" township/voting district.

From: Woods Walker
14-Oct-18
Oh come on now....Sybil is a bald faced liar and proves it every time hesheit stinks the place up with another full of sh*t post . We all know that. What else did you expect? The truth??? HA! Democrats HAVE to lie. That's the only way they can advance their anti-American agenda.

14-Oct-18
I have PO boxes in multiple states.

From: t-roy
14-Oct-18
You from Chicago originally, Ike?!!

14-Oct-18
Ordinarily, in the real world, one might think that the Democrat position ("Natives and African Americans are too dumb to figure out how to acquire a valid ID...") is at best, borderline racist. Pete

From: Woods Walker
14-Oct-18
There's no borderline about it. It's racism of low expectations.

  • Sitka Gear