Let's say a few Democrats worked a case up the ladder hoping the Supremes would take it up. And let's say that case was about eliminating a specific gun type from sale inside America. A gun type that is purely hypothetical…..doesn't even exist yet.

These Democrats argue, in my fictitious case, that even though no one makes this type gun and there are no plans to make it…..it may cause a problem if made…..and so the Supremes should ban it….even though it doesn't exist and isn't causing a problem in America currently.

You would, I imagine, laugh at such a silly case and chastise any Supreme Court that would take such a silly case up.

That's exactly what the Roberts Court has done.

How in god's green earth could voter fraud, that doesn't happen, help Democrats? You say "Democrats are infamous for stuffing the ballot box"……so I ask…..will you be submitting your evidence that "Democrats…stuff the ballot box"…to the Court?

And it's a bit "disingenous" to say that "Democrats are infamous for stuffing the ballot box" when in the Indiana case…..NOT ONE example could be cited.

This voter ID case being taken up by Roberts and Scalia is a continuation of the "strict deconstructionist" Court we saw last year. The Republicans, under Bush, came to town wanting to genetically change all government into Republican clones. With the Roberts Court…they have succeeded.

Admit it. Roy is right. You're upset because everyone knows voter fraud helps Democrats. Democrats are infamous for stuffing the ballot box with phony registrations and having people vote early and often.

The first link you give is about voter REGISTRATION. So that's a bogus example.
The second link speaks of dead people voting AFTER they were dead….eight people in Washington State.

One of the eight died after filling out his absentee ballot. The wife sent it in. Big fraud there.

The other point is that one of the US Attorneys fired for political reasons came from this area in Washington State….and the reason he was fired was because he wouldn't proceed with voter fraud cases. The reason the Attorney didn't proceed was because their wasn't evidence that voter fraud had occurred…..just like with Indiana.

You still don't get it….or you don't want to get it. Democrats inside America outnumber Republicans. It's simply a fact. One way for Republicans to fight back is to try to suppress Democratic voters from voting. That's what the US Attorney scandal was all about and that's why John Roberts is attempting to give the Republicans a green light to suppress some more this Novemeber. That's why he chose the case.

And that pisses me off. The law seeks to prevent something that isn't happening. Why would I want the Supremes to waste their time reviewing a law that seeks to solve something that doesn't exist?

It doesn't exist ANYWHERE as a problem. How would something that doesn't exist as a problem…..help the Democrats?

The far right court is seeking to help Republicans….just like they did in 2000.

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/206969_dead07.html

None??

The woman in Indiana that decided to challenge the voter registration was registered to vote in two states. Chief Justice Roberts did not call her and tell her to challenge the law. Thats not how it works. Why wouldn't you want the law reviewed by the highest court in the land before an election? Oh thats right because voter fraud helps the democrats.

The case John Roberts CHOSE in a general election year was an Indiana case. There were NO…..count 'em, none…..voter fraud cases in Indiana. None. The Supremes under Roberts decided to make it a national issue anyway. That's how the Roberts court rewards the conservatives who put him in office.

Here's the kicker Roy…..while the Roberts court takes up a voter ID case where there have been no instances of voter fraud….none, the White House has been systematically dismantling voter rights through the Justice Department and the U.S Attorney firings. Voter rights is where all the action has been…..not voter fraud.

So what does Roberts decide? To take up the issue where there is no problem.

Pure conservative, Republican bias. There is NO other explanation.

Laws get to the supreme court by being challenged. The supreme court cannot decide when a law will be challenged. They can only decide if the law being challenged should be reviewed. So the court is looking at this law. Also its terribly ignorant to say there are no cases of voter fraud. A simple use of google will reveal them for you. Try King County Washington.