Voter-ID ruling worries Democrats
Lawyer Blogs
The Supreme Court's decision Monday to uphold Indiana's photo-ID law in elections will permit Republican-dominated legislatures in other states to pass legislation that liberal political advocates say will disenfranchise poorer, Democratic-leaning voters.
Project Vote, a liberal-leaning voter-registration group, said 59 voter-ID bills have been introduced in 24 states, nearly all of them by Republicans, during the 2008 legislative session. Republican legislators in 11 states also are pushing bills to require proof of citizenship to register to vote.
More than 20 states, including Arizona, require some type of identification at the polls. The Supreme Court, on a 6-3 vote, ruled that Indiana has a "valid interest in protecting the integrity and reliability of the electoral process,' " Justice John Paul Stevens said in an opinion that was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Anthony Kennedy.
Stevens said Indiana's desire to prevent fraud and to inspire voter confidence in the election system are important even though there have been no reports of the kind of fraud the law was designed to combat. The law does not apply to absentee balloting, where election experts agree the threat of fraud is higher.
The use of photo IDs as a way to curb voter fraud has become a touchstone for Democrats, who accuse the GOP of engaging in a vast conspiracy to restrict voting of the poor, the elderly and minorities.
Congress investigated the Bush administration's Justice Department last year over allegations that its Civil Rights Division had twisted enforcement of the nation's voting-rights laws to aid Republicans and had authorized restrictive voter-ID laws in various states.
Related listings
-
Supreme Court upholds photo ID law for voters
Lawyer Blogs 04/28/2008The Supreme Court ruled Monday that states can require voters to produce photo identification without violating their constitutional rights, validating Republican-inspired voter ID laws.In a splintered 6-3 ruling, the court upheld Indiana's strict ph...
-
After Court Ruling, States to Proceed With Executions
Lawyer Blogs 04/23/2008States began moving forward with plans for executions this week after the Supreme Court declined last Wednesday to review the appeals of death row inmates who had challenged lethal-injection methods in nearly a dozen states.The court had issued order...
-
Court lifts stays of execution for 3 death row inmates
Lawyer Blogs 04/21/2008Prosecutors moved quickly Monday to set new execution dates for three death-row inmates, hours after the Supreme Court lifted a reprieve it granted last fall so it could consider the constitutionality of lethal injection.The court blocked the executi...
Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC
A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party
Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party
However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.