Voter ID: Most liberal circuit denies liberals' Constitutional challenge.

Yesterday's decision in Gonzalez v. Arizona by the United States Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, in a near unanimous en banc decision, strikes a solid blow for  real democracy. 

In a real democracy only lawful voters vote and the candidate with the most votes wins.  In a sham democracy anyone votes, or any one may vote multiple times, and the best cheater wins.

Since Bush v. Gore closed the door on the Labor/Socialist/Democrats preferred method of fraud (voting after the election closes) mischeviously creative LSD opened a new national window:  produce unlawful voters at the polls on election day. 

Hot Air did a great expose a couple of weeks ago on the hypocrisy of the LSD opposition to voter identification laws.  Needless to say the LSD support for mob rule in federal elections does not extend to entering federal buildings.

The Ninth Circuit specifically held that the Arizona requirement that voters produce a picture ID at the polls is neither unconstitutional nor violative of the Voting Rights Act.  The majorities' dicta further dismissed the notion that paying a nominal fee to obtain picture identification is an unconstitutional poll tax.

"Gonzalez and ITCA do not argue that requiring voters to show identification at the polls is itself a poll tax. Rather, they argue that, because some voters do not possess the identification required under Proposition 200, those voters will be required to spend money to obtain the requisite documentation, and that this payment is indirectly equivalent to a tax on the right to vote. This analysis is incorrect. Although obtaining the identification required under § 16-579 may have a cost, it is neither a poll tax itself (that is, it is not a fee imposed on voters as a prerequisite for voting), nor is it a burden imposed on voters who refuse to pay a poll tax."

Possession of picture identification is almost universal for every American past seventh grade.  The concept that possession of a picture ID card is unconstitutionally burdensome is so disconnected from reality that it found but one supporter in the nation's most liberal circuit. 

Gonzalez, and the even more controlling precedent in Crawford v. Marion County Election Board, in which liberal Justice John Paul Stevens wrote: "[w]e cannot conclude that the statute [requiring picture identification at the polls] imposes 'excessively burdensome requirements' on any class of voters", are slowly grinding the Lefts pursuit of uncontrollable mob elections into historical dust.