When Political Speech Comes under Fire

What? No one is suggesting people not vote. Disenfranchising anybody is wrong. But one can be disenfranchised in two ways: by being denied the right to vote, as happened in many Southern states until the 1960s; or by having one’s vote canceled out by someone who isn’t casting a legal ballot. In a 2006 U.S. Supreme Court case, Purcell v. Gonzalez, the court handed down a unanimous decision reinstating Arizona’s voter-ID law. The court stated: “Voter fraud drives honest citizens out of the democratic process. . . . Voters who fear their legitimate votes will be outweighed by fraudulent ones will feel disenfranchised.”

Liberal groups are using fears of the first kind of disenfranchisement being denied the right to vote to provide excuses for why we shouldn’t worry about the second kind having a legal ballot canceled out by an illegal one. Both varieties of disenfranchisement are wrong and need to be combated.

via When Political Speech Comes under Fire – John Fund – National Review Online.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: