Photo I.D.

The U.S. Supreme Court decided yesterday that requiring a voter to show photo identification was not an undue hardship. The Court upheld Indiana's photo I.D law, and in the process opened up the possibility that other states will follow suit.

Missouri has already passed a photo I.D. law, but it was struck down by the Missouri Supreme Court. The Source would expect to see legislation next session which will offer a constitutional amendment to correct that decision and bring Missouri in line with yesterday's decision.

Of course, opponents to more fair elections are balking at the SCOTUS decision. In the oddest argument possible, Secretary of State Robin Carnahan said that Missouri would not be affected, saying "I think this ruling doesn't really change anything. 

Yet Carnahan admits that the Supreme Court found that "justices didn't think there was sufficient evidence of burden and sufficient evidence of voters that would be harmed."  That was precisely the argument used by Carnahan and others to fight against Missouri's law, and it is now proven untrue by the highest court in the land.

Carnahan, and all Missouri politicians, should support letting the voters decide the issue. The courts have spoken, now it is our turn. Even if she doesn't support the end result, Carnahan should back a vote on a constitutional amendment as soon as feasible.

Comments

[voter]

Actually, since Indiana gives photo IDs for FREE, the SC ruled that requiring them to vote is not a burden. So if MO wants voter ID, they would need to provide free IDs. Otherwise, it is a poll tax.

It helps to read these rulings carefully.