Today's Paper Latest stories Obits 10 things to do this weekend The TV Column Newsletters Wally Hall Weather Puzzles/games

HARRISBURG, Pa. — A nearly 2-year-old requirement that almost all of Pennsylvania’s 8.2 million voters must show photo identification before casting a ballot was struck down Friday by a state judge, setting the stage for a courtroom showdown before the state’s highest court.

Commonwealth Court Judge Bernard L. McGinley, a Democrat, said the law would unreasonably burden the fundamental right to vote, and the state had been unable to convincingly explain why it was necessary.

“Voting laws are designed to assure a free and fair election; the Voter ID Law does not further this goal,” McGinley wrote in his 103-page ruling.

Read tomorrow's Arkansas Democrat-Gazette for full details.

Sponsor Content


You must be signed in to post comments
  • bbos42
    January 17, 2014 at 12:44 p.m.

    The “Right to Vote” was intended to apply only to the US citizens and not to any one who walks in the door....What would keep Citizens of Australia from voting an absentee ballot in Australia; since this judges ruling does not seem to require Residency or Citizenship as a prerequisite to vote In Pennsylvania. Im going to apply for a Pennsylvania absentee ballot to see if I can help vote this judge out of office. Why not, this is what he has given me, an invitation to use my Fundamental right to vote!!!

    January 17, 2014 at 3:10 p.m.

    Let everyone vote. Vote early and vote often. The same logic applies to drivers license, Social Security, welfare, food stamps, whatever. We should not be required to have any proof of these to obtain them. When I watch "Cops" on TV, none of them have any form of I.D. Why should I? I think the next time I vote, I'm going to keep changing clothes and go back through the line over and over. JFC.

  • djigoo
    January 17, 2014 at 3:56 p.m.

    Polling place fraud is so rare as to be statistically insignificant. Why spend money battling a nonexistent problem?

    Unless, of course, you want to make certain that only the "right people" vote.

    In that case, "Voter ID" laws are VERY efficient.

    I side with statistics and fiscal responsibility.

  • RonalFos
    January 18, 2014 at 8:05 a.m.

    South Carolina enacted some of the most restrictive voter laws in the country to stop so called voter fraud. In the last election over 6 million people voted in SC. There were only a little over a 100 instances of someone voting illegally. So to stop fraud that amounted to less than a 10000th of a percent they are blocking thousands of legal voters.

  • Populist
    January 18, 2014 at 8:47 a.m.

    Many poor people and elderly minorities who vote don't drive and don't have a drivers license. Consequently, the GOP wants the voter id requirements to give them another couple of percentage points so that they can win close elections. Another old trick is to make sure that your opponent's big areas of support do not have enough equipment so that long lines dilute his vote. This is how Bush won Florida over Gore. This was Republican payback for JFK's dirty tricks in Chicago over Nixon. The FEC does nothing, and the Justice Department over the years has not concentrated on these types of crimes.

  • JakeTidmore
    January 18, 2014 at 9:56 a.m.

    So when most of the problems with voting involve those in charge of handling the votes and there's more chance of someone hiding underground getting hit by lightning than someone voting illegally (and risking 10 years in prison for the sake of one lousy vote!!), it's about time a judge saw the stupidity in the Voter IDiot law.

  • Packman
    January 18, 2014 at 4:47 p.m.

    Is anyone surprised the judge is a liberal demorat? And has anyone ever seen a more tortured statement? "Commonwealth Court Judge Bernard L. McGinley, a Democrat, said the law would unreasonably burden....." How absurd to say attaining a valid ID is an unreasonable burden for one of the most cherished rights in America? There are three reasons people fail to attain an ID. They are either too stupid, too lazy, or too illegal.
    “Voting laws are designed to assure a free and fair election; the Voter ID Law does not further this goal, McGinley wrote in his 103-page ruling." This is just stupid. Any measure that helps protect the integrity of the system helps assure a fair election. The judge is a moron
    This issue illustrates a fundamental difference between libs and conservatives. Conservatives have a fundamental belief in the goodness of personal responsibility and self-reliance. Libs have a fundamental belief in excuse making and victimhood.
    Hey Populist - "Many poor people and elderly minorities who vote don't drive and don't have a drivers license." Why are you hating on poor people and minorities? Poor folks and minorities are ever bit as resourceful as rich people an white folks? Tell the truth, Pop. Do you have a white sheet and matching pointed hat hanging in your closet?
    Hey Jake - Since when did showing personal responsibility rise to the level of "stupidity"? Oh, wait, I forget. You live in liberal la la land. In your world self-reliance and belief in oneself are stupid concepts. SMH, just another reason modern day liberalism is destroying this great country.

  • NoCrossNoCrown
    January 18, 2014 at 7:10 p.m.

    When hit in the face with the truth, is it a surprise to anyone that those speaking the truth are called names. Anti-American, Liberal ...ect.
    Why they hate the truth so much must be a reflection of alternate universe in which they choose to live and just how naïve they really are...... How Sad!