Also in this playlist...
This transcript is automatically generated
Well a major controversy is brewing in Texas right now everything's bigger in Texas right.
This after the Justice Department blocked the state from enforcing a law.
That requires voters to show state issued photo ID when they go to the polls the reason.
Well attorney general Eric Holder says the proposed law would unfairly affect poor Latinos.
And the battle is likely to play out across the country is more than thirty states have similar legislation in the works.
So why is it okay to require ID when cashing a check or boarding a plane.
And not a holes.
Let's ask Fox News senior judicial analyst judge Andrew Napolitano.
Use -- I don't look -- a lot of people say it's important.
To make sure that the voting process is sacrosanct that everybody is you know on the up and up when they go to the polls but you say in this case be careful what you wish -- Yet be careful what you wish for John because this may lead to a requirement of of a national ID card.
This if if conservatives get their question I understand.
And sympathize with -- right.
To make sure somebody isn't voting who was already voted or who doesn't have a right to vote.
But the idea of forcing us to carry ID.
Which -- -- become a biometric ID which -- all kinds of electronic information embedded and it.
When the police can say hey Jon Scott where did you come from we're going let me see your idea whether you're going to vote whether you're going to work.
It's not a society that the framers gave us a not a society that we want that's one argument well the -- other argument is.
It Unita an -- for everything today.
And there there definitely is -- at the polls it's minimally intrusive to have someone show the ID before they vote what's the big deal.
Back when that's the point I mean -- -- have -- I have an idea to drive I have to I have to show an idea to check into it a hotel correct rich Lowery makes the point that you you have to show an ID.
To get into the building that houses Eric holder's Justice Department correct here's here here's the problem in my view.
The problem as a federal statute that lets the attorney general interfere.
With the way the states run their voting.
If someone believes there right has been interfered with they can sue in federal court.
But for the attorney general -- say I'm a -- credit watch and come up political appointee I don't like a statute in Austin, Texas.
That's not authorized under the constitution was of the problems with the statute that lets him do it the problem is not what his exercise of his judgment.
All right judge's job I don't wanna -- your hypothetical you say it could be a problem down the road but we are having a problem with -- voter fraud right now so I don't know it's a tradeoff.
Pleasure John -- -- Napolitano will argue about it in your office human.
Filter by section