When it Comes to Voter ID, Ageism is the New Racism
Acquiring an ID is far too complicated for America’s educated, apparently.
Via the New York Times:
…lawyers for seven college students and three voter-registration advocates are making the novel constitutional argument that the law violates the 26th Amendment, which lowered the voting age to 18 from 21. The amendment also declares that the right to vote “shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any state on account of age.”
The sound you just heard was the collective gasp of thousands of first-year Constitutional Law professors looking for their next great exam question.
This case is novel in the way that most of the race-based challenges to voter ID were novel: the lawyers are using a basic concept–in this case, the Constitutional standard governing the voting age–and twisting it into a big progressive knot to use as a political tool against the other side of the aisle. It’s despicable, and intellectually dishonest, but it’s nothing new and certainly not surprising.
The advocates in this case are blasting personal anecdotes from students via the mainstream media in an effort to win the culture battle before they ever see the inside of a courtroom:
Under the North Carolina law passed last year, the period for early voting was shortened and same-day registration was eliminated. Beginning in 2016, voters will need to show photo identification, and student ID cards, including those issued by state universities, will not be acceptable. In most instances, neither will an out-of-state driver’s license.
The law also eliminated a program in which teenagers filled out their voter-registration forms early and were automatically registered when they turned 18.
“For people like me, it makes what should be a simple process very difficult,” said Josue Berduo, 20, an economics major at North Carolina State University and a Democrat who is one of the plaintiffs.
Mr. Berduo, who is from Asheville, N.C., has a state identification card. But many students do not, he said, and no matter how much attention the law gets, some students will be unaware of the changes and will arrive at polling places carrying out-of-state licenses or student identification cards.
A tale of woe, indeed–but a tale that makes absolutely no sense in the context of the real world. Mr. Berduo claims that North Carolina’s voter ID law has a discriminatory impact on students in two ways: first, because the law allegedly makes obtaining an in-state ID more difficult, it will prevent students from obtaining valid ID; and second, because it may be impossible to get the word out to every student about what’s required at the polling place, the law will prevent students from successfully voting at all.
A simple Google Search of “Voter ID law North Carolina” revealed several handy articles detailing exactly what’s required to vote in North Carolina both now, and starting in 2016. Furthermore, this issue has been in the media since at least 2011.
The inconvenient truth is, any student who is interested in voting in the state where they’re going to school (as opposed to voting in their home state via absentee ballot) can spend five minutes on the internet and find out exactly what they have to do.
The Supreme Court has held that voter ID laws are generally valid, but progressive groups have spent the last few years picking away at the details of how new election laws are implemented, and what provisions exist to ensure all eligible voters are able to get their hands on a valid ID by Election Day. The lawyers in this case are upping the ante, and claiming that laws passed in North Carolina and other states were intentionally crafted to prevent students from voting:
Lawyers for the students believe they can make the case that the law is intentionally discriminatory. As proof of this intent, they note that the state prohibited the Division of Motor Vehicles from registering 17-year-olds who will turn 18 by Election Day this fall. All other* eligible voters could register there. In court documents filed in late June, the state said it had reversed that policy but did not say why.
The lawyers also point to the state’s decision to allow military and veteran identification cards, but not student IDs, as “strong evidence that the legislature wanted to make it difficult for young citizens to vote.”
This allegation, of course, completely ignores the fact that not all public or private universities have uniform systems for verifying the identities of their students.
In the run up to 2016, we can count on the left to mount more challenges to voter ID laws; and we can’t count on the lawyers to make the PR arguments for us. Conservatives need to reach outside of the bubble and make sure that voters in states with these laws understand that Republican lawmakers are working hard to make sure that everyone’s vote counts.
Failing to reach out now is tantamount to ceding ground to the leftist narrative.
*Note that 17 year olds are not technically eligible to vote. Details tend to be inconvenient.
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
…but if they are THAT ill-formed and lazy, they really have no business casting a vote.
Ill-formed and lazy.
Isn’t that the Democrat’s target for voters?
…and dependent. Don’t forget “dependent”…
If a woman and a man are equally intoxicated, and the university says that what happens after is the man’s fault (isn’t everything?), then clearly women are incapable of voting or driving cars – according to the feminist’s logic.
We need to repeal a few amendments.
Just because you’re a student in North Carolina doesn’t mean you can vote in North Carolina.
You also have to be a legal resident of North Carolina.
So if you’re 18 and a resident, you can vote even though you’re a student. If you’re not a resident, you vote in the state in which you are a resident.
I apologize to 1L students everywhere for giving them the answer to the exam question, and for doing so without all the legal verbiage.
This was my thought as well. How is this even a case?
The Left’s aversion to Voter ID Laws in situations such as this just continue to support then notion that they might be cheating to win elections. If the Democrats were really worried about the disenfranchisement of minorities through Voter ID Laws, wouldn’t they work with Republican lawmakers to ensure that didn’t happen? Instead, Democrats and the Left just oppose the notion altogether. Any group that seeks to actively oppose the integrity of elections should be looked upon with suspicion.
They have absentee ballots for voters who are out of their home state on election day (days?). I used them most of my military career.
” some students will be unaware of the changes and will arrive at polling places carrying out-of-state licenses or student identification cards.”
Hundreds of generations before you have registered and voted quite successfully, many of us with just lowly high school diplomas. NOW all of a sudden this is too difficult? WTH? I mean, really……..
Typical whiny liberals.
Student IDs are not accepted because they are:
1) Issued to students that are NOT citizens of the US, and thus not eligible to vote
2) WAY too easy to counterfeit (seriously you’d be shocked how easy it is, most of them are just printed plastic, no watermark or anything)
3) Have no expiration date
1) Issued to students that are NOT citizens of the US, and thus not eligible to vote
I’m certain the student activists and their lawyers are well aware of this.
Ask any bartender near a university…
The election officials won’t accept out-of-state driver’s licenses? Horror of all horrors. The very idea that you out-of-staters can’t voter in North Carolina. That would be like saying illegal aliens can’t vote, and we know that’s not true.
Over 35,000 voters in NC in 2012 also cast ballots (illegally) in other states.
The Democrats want their people to be able to vote at least twice.
That’s all right. A newspaper(remember them?) found that in 2000 around 200,000 people voted in NY and FL. Two thirds dem, one third repug.
Seems simple to me: If you’re trying to vote with an out-of-state driver’s license, then either you’re still a citizen of your parents’ state and are guilty of fraudulently attempting to vote, or you’ve become a bona fide resident of NC and are guilty of driving without a valid license. The only way out of that bind is to claim that you live on campus, have no car, and don’t drive anywhere.
You may recall at the height of the controversy over the new NC law, Democrats found a 93 year-old grandmother from NC to say getting a new photo ID would be a burden on her.
They neglected to check her out in their haste to get her before the cameras. The woman already HAD a state-issued photo ID.
Democrats lie, cheat, and steal. It’s who they are.
Here’s a link: http://m.nationalreview.com/corner/356478/lefts-faux-martyrs-three-hans-von-spakovsky
“The amendment also declares that the right to vote “shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any state on account of age.””
Interesting quote. I guess that if that’s the case, it doesn’t matter how old an American citizen is, they can vote. Good to know. I’ll bring my 9 year old nephew along with me the next time I vote. He could go alone, but he doesn’t know how to drive.
Promise him an ice-cream if he votes right…
“The right of citizens of the United States, who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of age.”
Oh, DARN! I was looking forward to breaking him in to the conservative way!
Full time students shouldn’t be allowed to vote in the state their university is in.
Just as they can be declared dependents on their parents taxes in their home state, they should file an absentee ballot and vote in the state they come from.
Students who are full time employed or residents of the state can vote but not carpet baggers.
Who’s to say how much distortion of government is caused by out of state students (who tend to vote liberal) voting where they have no roots and no intention of living.
You can’t move to another state temporarily and vote in that state either (depending on the residency requirements of that state.)
The law apparently was short sighted by not allowing University ID as allowed. (maybe they were thinking the same thing I am but didn’t want to state it so boldly.)
Make them get a local drivers license or ID.
How many students vote in more than one state because of being able to claim two different states as residency?
Most state public universities that have different resident and non-resent tuition rates are extremely careful screening actual residents from non-residents.
I own homes in two states (yeah… snow bird) but am legally a resident of only one of them. I pay property taxes on the home where I am not a resident even though I do not get to vote on bond issues or other issues that directly affect my tax rate. I am OK with that. I understand.
However, it really pisses me off when the local newspaper and the university encourage out of state students to register and vote in local elections. They are not residents and they will not be around to enjoy the fruits of their vote choices but, as long as they usually vote democrat, they are encouraged to vote.
Here is the deal…. if you are a student and you are paying non-resident tuition, you need to register and vote in your home state and only in your home state.
When students are allowed to register to vote in the city or town where they are going to school, it’s not just state and national elections they’re eligible to vote in. They can also vote in local elections. In some college towns, the school population rivals or even exceeds the population of the town. A large student voting can wreak havoc with how a town is run.
better yet stop students from voting unless they are permanent residents of that state.
Meanwhile, my 100-year-old grandfather, who didn’t finish elementary school, has a valid ID. And votes.
I am always amazed that “college students” or most Democrats are so upset that a college ID cannot be used as a valid photo id for voting, but a military id can be used. It has been a while since I had a college student ID but, as I remember, all students enrolled in the institution had the same type of id. There was no distinction made for foreign students vs. citizens of the United States. Of course, it is not legal for non-citizens to vote in federal elections, nor in most community elections. There are some communities (in solid blue states, no surprise) that do allow non-citizens to vote in local elections. Of course, the real reason they are so up in arms about photo id is that it will seriously cut down on in person voter fraud. Such fraud does exist in great numbers, but unless election officials area legally allowed to ask for a photo id, they are rarely caught. Of course, the Dems love to point out that very few cases have been prosecuted in the past. Thanks to groups like True the Vote, that is changing. I strongly urge each of you to take a day of vacation on election day and volunteer to work in the polls on that one day. If we all took time to participate in making sure there are enough informed people working the polls, then the fraud would drop dramatically, and we would all have a better appreciation for our sacred right to vote.