On Wednesday a Plan was approved that states that it will NOT be mandatory for Texans to show an I.D. in order to vote in November. A lawsuit had been brought forth by many groups that chose to sue the state. Their demand was that anyone without an I.D. be allowed instead to sign a declaration stating that they are a U.S. Citizen, and simply present proof of residence. I.E. a utility bill, or paycheck.
Jennifer Clark, the New-York based attorney who represented the plaintiffs in the suit stated, “Certainly what happened today in court was a victory. This is the first time in three years voters will cast a regular ballot in November. It’s a huge victory.”
Gary Bledsoe, Texas NAACP President, called the decision, “a big step I our continuing fight to push back against discriminatory laws that have no place in the Lone Star State.”
A federal judge on Wednesday approved a plan that says it won’t be mandatory for Texans to present an ID in order to vote in the November general election. The sweeping changes OK’d by U.S. District Judge Nelva Gonzales Ramos come a month after a federal appeals court found the state’s voter ID law — which was passed by the Legislature in 2011 and went into effect in 2013 — to be racially discriminatory.
Personally I don’t see the benefit here. We have an I.D. for everything else. Purchases of firearms, the ability to drive, proof of age and residence to name a few. The only thing that will come from removing the law to have Voter I.D.’s be mandatory to vote is that a large number of illegals will be able to sway the vote. In my opinion this is just more Democratic drivel that they are trying to push along with groups like the NAACP to allow for non-citizens to be able to vote for their candidate in the hopes that the numbers will get Hillary elected. Correct me if I’m wrong but in a way, doesn’t that still fall under voter fraud via judicial proceedings?
I would also love if someone could explain how having a voter I.D. is in any way discriminatory. That statement just astounds me.