Opponents of the law, which U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder blocked louis vuitton outlet last year under the 1965 Voting Rights Act, will challenge the credibility of its chief author, South Carolina state Rep. Alan Clemmons.
Lawyers for the law's foes, including civil rights groups, will say Clemmons took false credit for its reasonable impediment clause, which allows voters to cast ballots if they have reasonable excuses for not having photo identification. Lawyers also will say Clemmons misrepresented his relationship with a man who sent him an e-mail about the law that the Myrtle Beach, S.C., Republican authentic louis vuitton acknowledged under oath last month was racist.
Lawyers for South Carolina will respond that the voter ID law is aimed at preventing election fraud, and they'll point to key Supreme Court rulings that say states don't need to show the existence of fraud in order to take steps against it.
Attorneys also will argue that state officials' plans for implementing the law aren't contradictory or at variance with ugg boots outlet its provisions.
At issue under the Voting Rights Act, which protects minorities' access to the ballot box, is whether the South Carolina law's requirement that voters possess one of five forms of photo identification would have a disproportionately harmful effect on African Americans. Of several state voter ID laws under legal scrutiny, the South Carolina case is among the most closely watched because of the state's history of troubled race relations and because it could have national implications from an expected U.S. Supreme Court ruling on it.
Lawyers for the law's foes, including civil rights groups, will say Clemmons took false credit for its reasonable impediment clause, which allows voters to cast ballots if they have reasonable excuses for not having photo identification. Lawyers also will say Clemmons misrepresented his relationship with a man who sent him an e-mail about the law that the Myrtle Beach, S.C., Republican authentic louis vuitton acknowledged under oath last month was racist.
Lawyers for South Carolina will respond that the voter ID law is aimed at preventing election fraud, and they'll point to key Supreme Court rulings that say states don't need to show the existence of fraud in order to take steps against it.
Attorneys also will argue that state officials' plans for implementing the law aren't contradictory or at variance with ugg boots outlet its provisions.
At issue under the Voting Rights Act, which protects minorities' access to the ballot box, is whether the South Carolina law's requirement that voters possess one of five forms of photo identification would have a disproportionately harmful effect on African Americans. Of several state voter ID laws under legal scrutiny, the South Carolina case is among the most closely watched because of the state's history of troubled race relations and because it could have national implications from an expected U.S. Supreme Court ruling on it.
RSS Feed