Today the New York Times issued an editorial discussing the upcoming term of the Roberts Court. While the editorial discussed several of the Court's high-profile cases, the discussion of Indiana's disenfranchising mandatory government-issued voter photo ID law stood out: 
The case that will most test the court's ability to rise above partisanship is a challenge to Indiana's voter ID law. Indiana is one of a growing number of states that require voters to present a government-issued photo ID. Such laws have been billed as anti-vote-fraud measures, but there is little evidence of vote fraud at the polls. The Republicans who have pushed these laws are trying to make it hard for poor and minority voters, who are less likely than other groups to have drivers' licenses - and more likely to vote Democratic - to cast ballots. The court has traditionally championed voting rights, but a conservative majority may boost Republican chances in 2008 by endorsing this disturbing barrier to voting.
The New York Times correctly calls these voter ID bills what they are - a thinly veiled attempt to use the threat of non-existent polling place impersonation to scare states into adopting disenfranchising legislation for partisan political gain. Let's hope the Roberts Court acts to bring this country together by rejecting an attempt to erect barriers to the polling place for eligible elderly, minority, and low-income voters.
Keep a look out, we'll have more detailed information on this important case soon. Read the entire editorial here.
