by Sam Hieb
For a moment, the meeting was like being inside the black-and-white newsreel footage of the civil rights protests of the 1950s and 1960s or the tied-dyed protests of the 1960s and 1970s, minus the hemp and headbands.
And it was pretty darned wonderful.
The people will be heard, even if they have to break the rules, shout and clap and sing.
Looked like more than a few in the crowd at the courthouse indeed might have been protesting in the ’50s and ’60s. But seriously—National Review counters:
….the Left has taken to pretending that requiring a photo ID to vote is the resurrection of Jim Crow. Predictably, doing so seems to have little, if anything, to do with the Constitution and much to do with partisan politics. After all, strong protections remain in place to protect voting rights. The courts can strike down policies on the basis of “disproportionate impact,” even where there is no provable discriminatory intent. Jurisdictions that act unconstitutionally can still be required to submit to preclearance. And, behind the clear terms of the Voting Rights Act, there remains the 15th Amendment, which expressly forbids abridging the right to vote on the basis of race. All that the Supreme Court did was make it so that plaintiffs now have to prove in a court of law that their rights were violated — as is the case with every other civil right.
….The Fourth Circuit went out of its way to ignore evidence, impugn the motives of North Carolina’s legislature, and concoct specious legal rationales to forward a political agenda. North Carolina governor Pat McCrory says he plans to appeal the decision to the Supreme Court. That body should reaffirm its recent good sense and restore North Carolina’s law.
Ms. Ladd adds that the court’s removal of North Carolina’s “voter restrictions” will “will mean increased voter access in November.” But what if turnout actually goes down with the “voter restrictions”—especially–ironically enough–among minorities without Obama on the ticket.