One of the strangest things in American politics is the partisan debate over the issue of whether voters should have to produce identification when they show up at the polls. Democrat politicos constantly argue against states that want to require ID to vote in elections, branding those efforts as “racist.”
It’s never explained, of course, why asking for a driver’s license or state ID card disadvantages black or Hispanic voters.. But the way Democrats talk you’d think it was the equivalent of a poll tax designed to keep “po, ignunt” black folks from being able to exercise their franchise.
But how? Do black people truly not have driver’s licenses? Is there something about being dark-skinned that makes it hard or impossible to get the standard ID that everyone uses daily to buy booze, or cigarettes, or any other adult item? Obviously not, but in a country where the left half is primed to see whites as devils fixin’ to git them blacks, it plays well.
Vice President and now Democrat Party presidential nominee—she who has suddenly “become black” despite building her image on her Indian heritage on her mother’s side—Kamala Harris recently came under fire for requiring identification to enter one of her rallies in Phoenix. The least-popular vice president in history has a history of calling voter ID laws racist.
Gold. Upgraded. Buy real gold from $1. Store it in America. Sell it with one click.
Well, the worm has turned at the Supreme Court, which just issued a 5-4 decision allowing an even more “controversial” requirement to go forward in Arizona. SCOTUS said Arizona can force potential voters to prove that they are U.S. citizens if the would-be voter tries to register to vote using Arizona’s state form.
Over 40,000 people are registered to vote in federal elections in Arizona who haven’t provided proof of citizenship.
The vote was 5-4 on allowing limited enforcement of the law. One conservative Justice, Justice Amy Coney Barrett, joined the three liberal justices in dissent. The court, in a brief order, did not explain its reasoning for how four justices could possibly take this stance.
This Could Be the Most Important Video Gun Owners Watch All Year
It’s incredible that such an issue had to be litigated all the way to the Supreme Court. It raises the question: “Who thinks there’s something wrong with making sure illegal aliens don’t vote in U.S. elections?” Democrats, that’s who.
Let’s look at what social media users have to say about it on X (formerly Twitter).
It’s hard to argue against this guy’s point... To check out the rest of this story, visit WokeSpy.
Gold is the oldest answer. SoundMoney makes owning it as easy as the apps you already use.
The opinions expressed by contributors and/or content partners are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of LifeZette. Contact us for guidelines on submitting your own commentary.
Join the Discussion
COMMENTS POLICY: We have no tolerance for messages of violence, racism, vulgarity, obscenity or other such discourteous behavior. Thank you for contributing to a respectful and useful online dialogue.