Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticCat
As a general rule, yes. Statutes are generally presumed to be constitutional. But any legislature considering a law like this should surely think ahead to the lawsuit that will come.
If a law burdens a "fundamental" or "core" right -- and the right to vote typically is found to fit that bill, so it seems at least reasonable to predict that a court might find that it does so here -- then the presumption of constitutionality is lost, and the statute will only be upheld if the government can show that it is narrowly tailored to serve a compelling governmental interest. That's where the rubber would hit the road on needing to show that there actually is a problem and that voter ID will address that problem and goes no further than necessary to address that problem.
|
See Crawford v. Marion County Election Board, 553 U.S. 181 (2008).
The only distinguishing factor is that Texas drivers licenses cost money. The only question is whether that fact, when taking into account that there are many other ways a citizen can prove their identity which don't cost money, is enough to distinguish from Crawford.
The SCOTUS has already upheld these sorts of laws in principle. It's hard to imagine that the Texas case will come out differently.