Also in this playlist...
This transcript is automatically generated
We'll battle is brewing in the state of Texas and it could end up in the US Supreme Court after -- law requiring voters to show photo ID at the polls was unanimously struck down by three judge panel this panel.
Said that the state of Texas failed to prove the wall would not harm low income and minority voters but the attorney general the state Greg Abbott.
Says that ruling borders on hypocrisy and believes -- is ruling is a guaranteed.
Today's ruling is deeply disappointing for voting in the state of Texas.
In Texas just like in every other state people should be required to show a photo ID when they go cast their vote.
Here this three judge panel in Washington DC says Texas unlike other states is not entitled to have a voter ID law in effect of this election.
This is contrary.
To already existing Supreme Court precedent.
Four years ago the United States Supreme Court said voter ID laws were perfectly constitutional.
It was -- and other states -- should be allowed in the state of Texas also.
Joining us now to talk about a Hans -- Zbikowski is a senior fellow at The Heritage Foundation thanks for being -- Our when he talks about -- -- press and they started about the Indiana case Indiana have voter ID and went all the way to US Supreme Court invalidated.
So my question and then you write in my question do you is is this Texas law almost identical to the -- -- -- law.
-- the AG in Texas says it is but as I read this -- the ruling by this federal panel they say no it's the most stringent.
In the nation at Texas one.
Wife's not identical but it is very similar and looked -- that the court made a major mistake that major mistake they made is there.
Equal using poverty as a proxy.
For race and they're saying well this will affect.
Poor voters therefore it's discriminatory under the voting rights act sorry the voting rights act.
Prohibits racial discrimination.
And you can't use poverty as as a proxy for race when -- looking at that statute.
Well help me out here the judges noted.
That this is strict on -- burden is on the war and then they noticed that Texas minorities are more likely to live in poverty as opposed to other states.
So is is there a disproportionate.
Effect in Texas that you would not otherwise see in states like Indiana.
Now that that's not true at all I mean look.
It Georgia for example which has a photo ID law that was found to be perfectly okay under the voting rights act by federal courts.
You know 25% of the population.
Is African American in in that state there are also very poor individuals there and and -- the Supreme Court and other courts have said.
The costs associated with getting a free ID.
Are not a burden and on reasonable burden on voters so again this court's ruling goes against what other federal courts have said about that particular -- That the cost is free for the voter ID but you've got to have a -- -- -- a lot of poor people have birth certificates they got to pay 22 bucks for birth certificate.
In Texas as opposed -- nine bucks in Indiana.
Said there's a difference there I'm not sure how I would characterize that Texas is -- -- -- It it's unique and a different way each huge.
And people who live in rural areas might have a harder.
To getting their hands on some of the things they need.
You haven't got applies to many different things to me for example if someone is poor and they are going to apply.
For public assistance for welfare.
You know the exact same kind.
Issue is present there and yet I I don't see that anyone is raising some kind welfare is a privilege and Venus are right so there's a distinction isn't there.
Well there is but the courts have previously said that this is not an unreasonable burden for for voters who.
Look at they want to vote they've got to get registered they have to transport themselves to the polls there are a lot of things you have other things you have to do if you wanna vote.
If Texas is so deeply concerned as they say they are about voter fraud why did that court point now that.
Their presentation of evidence on voter fraud was pretty flimsy.
Now but I I disagree with that for example.
Lot of things Texas showed was that in the may primaries.
They had over 200 people show up at the polls to vote that the records later showed where -- That's that's a pretty good evidence -- that says that you really -- to have voter ID in the fall.
Well I I would note parenthetically that in those states that have passed voter.
ID laws minority voter participation.
Is -- Which would seem to defeat.
The argument of those who oppose voter ID -- months but koskie -- to see you thank you for being here.
Filter by section