Letters to the Editor

This letter is associated with the following article:
A Supreme Court decision upholding an Indiana voter I.D. law raises the question of what these laws are actually fighting.
  • Lay off Stevens, he's trying to moderate the opinion

    I have a feeling that Justice Stevens, someone you might think would be in the Souter, Ginsburg, Breyer camp, wrote the controlling opinion in this case to prevent a harsher precedent advocated by Scalia, Thomas, and Alito. He managed to peel off Roberts and Kennedy so that one could at least mount an "as applied" challenge to a voter ID law, meaning that such laws can be stricken if it's shown that the voter ID laws actually prevent somebody from voting. If Kennedy and Roberts joined Scalia, then the Supreme Court would have declared that voter ID laws pose minimal burdens, and it would be difficult to bring even an "as applied" challenge.