At the Examiner, we rejoice in yesterday’s good decision on the voter-photo-ID case. I’ve been writing about this case for quite some time. The only thing that is disappointing is that the main opinion by Stevens (with Kennedy and Roberts) took the typical Stevens/Kennedy tack of applying a “balancing test” to adjudge whether or not a photo ID requirement might, under other circumstances, be too burdensome; i.e., as always, Kennedy wants the court to always assert its power to make minute and solomonic judgements, for it to be the all-wise arbiter based on intuitive knowledge too lofty for us mere mortals to adjudge for ourselves or for us to write hard-and-fast rules about. Oh, Lord, the mischief that was caused when Reagan settled for Kennedy after Bork was Borked, rather than again trying for a home run such as Silberman or Starr. Scalia (with Thomas and Alito) had a better, more straightforward concurrence. Oh, well. Be thankful for good results, if not perfect reasoning.
Notice to Readers: The American Spectator and Spectator World are marks used by independent publishing companies that are not affiliated in any way. If you are looking for The Spectator World please click on the following link: https://thespectator.com/world.