Summary of the Photo ID Decision

[freeandequalpa]

For anyone who would like to read a detailed summary of the opinion denying the request to enjoin the photo ID law without actually reading all 70 pages of it:

http://freeandequalpa.wordpress.com/2012/08/15/petitioners-request-to-enjoin-enforcement-of-photo-id-law-denied/

[femmocrat]

1. K & R

What do you think are the chances of it being overturned on appeal?

[COLGATE4]

2. Very difficult. The PA Supreme Court has

7 members, but one is out of action. The remaining 6 are split 3 Rethugs, 3 Dems. If it's a tie vote, the decision of the lower court stands.

[Demit]

3. The only hope might be Ron Castille. And that 'strict scrutiny' thing.

But yes, unless the petitioners can strengthen their arguments (I'm not a lawyer, so I don't know what's possible in an appeal) this law will stand. Castille is a moderate Repub, a former Philly pol, so there's that slim chance... Simpson might've been just kicking the case upstairs... but he gave great import to all the existing cases that have upheld photo ID laws, and great import to the power of the state to regulate elections, so there's no doubt on where he stands on this issue.

I don't hold out much hope, there seems to be a terrible momentum on these laws, but still I'll be curious to read the PA Supreme Court's reasoning when they do rule.

[freeandequalpa]

4. Not promising

Unfortunately, I do not hold out much hope for a successful appeal. The most obvious line of attack is the standard of review -- a legal issue. But even if the Supreme Court decides that Judge Simpson should have applied strict scrutiny, that arguably would be "harmless error" unless the Supreme Court also finds that Judge Simpson erred when we concluded that Petitioners failed to present sufficient evidence that anyone would be disenfranchised by the law. As a general rule, appellate courts rarely reverse a finding by a trial court on the sufficiency of evidence , since the trial judge was there to see and hear the evidence come in live, while the appellate judges only can review the evidence and testimony on paper.

So, as a poll worker, I am resigning myself to the fact that I am going to have to enforce this pointless law.