Earlier this month, Commonwealth Court Judge Bernard McGinley ruled the state’s Voter ID law unconstitutional and the overwhelming number of our readers seem to agree with him.
“[The Voter ID Law is] invalid and unconstitutional on its face as the provision and issuance of compliant identification does not comport with liberal access and unreasonably burdens the right to vote,” the Judge wrote in his decision.
The state, actually the Governor’s office after the Attorney General passed the buck, still has the opportunity to appeal Judge McGinley’s ruling. So, last week, we decided to ask you whether you thought the state should appeal.
The answer was a resounding, and somewhat surprising, no. In fact, about two-thirds of readers are against an appeal.
202 respondents said that the state shouldn’t appeal while only 101 readers voted for the judicial maneuver.
The full results are included below:
Should the state appeal the Voter ID ruling?
- No, the state should not appeal. (66%)
- Yes, the state should appeal. (35%)
Loading ...
Loading ...
6 Responses
Gee, what are my options?
“Commiecrat” or plutocrat?
“pig wallowing Bolsheviks” or Fascists?
I suspect what is not reported is the fact that of the 202 respondents voting against an appeal, 202 were life-long Democrats.
name one precinct with your phony 150% turnout claim
Judging by the fact that 54 precincts in PA had 150% voter turnout with 100% of the vote for Obama, it only makes sense that voter I.d. shouldn’t exist. After all, the Commiecrat party wants as many 3rd world illegal immigrants from Mexico voting Commiecrat very early and very often. Judging by these poll #’s, it only makes sense that all of these pig wallowing Bolsheviks at BolsheviksPA don’t want voter I.D. because it would “disenfranchise” the illegal Mexicans from voting Commiecrat.
Surprising? To whom? People living in the Tea Party/ALEC-constructed Echo Chamber on the Right? Not surprising at all. Voting is the bedrock of all other rights, and there better be a damn good reason for ANYONE to burden it. In this case, the ONLY reason was a blatantly partisan one, as so eloquently expressed by TurdsEye.
Unconstitutional! Clear enough that even Mike Turzai can grasp its meaning!