Yesterday the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Indiana’s law requiring voters to show photo identification. The Wall Street Journal comments favorably on the decision here.
It was a 6-3 decision. Hard to see much sense in the three dissents after the decision upholding the so-called Bipartisan Campaign Finance Reform Act, where the Court said it was permissible to trample all over the First Amendment in order to prevent any appearance of corruption. It should follow a fortiori that laws designed to prevent the actual corruption of elections by fraudulent votes with measures that don’t impinge upon the First Amendment are also constitutionally permissible.
