NAACP to prep voters

August 7, 2008
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
The NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund is sending attorneys to 10 states before the fall election to address voting barriers, according to the National Law Journal. Surprise, surprise, Indiana is one of those 10 states.

I’d wager the NAACP’s interest in our state has something to do with our recently upheld voter ID law and the confusion that still surrounds it. The U.S. Supreme Court upheld our voter ID law this spring, which requires voters produce photo identification before casting a ballot. Some people argued they were denied their right to vote in the May primary because even though they didn’t have the proper identification, they weren’t allowed to cast a provisional ballot.

The “Prepared to Vote” program will raise voter awareness of obstacles in the electoral process that may affect their right to vote. The non-partisan program wants to ensure everyone who is eligible to vote will be able to in the election. The group’s set up a Web site, http://www.preparedtovote.org, detailing more about the group’s work and state-specific information.

In Indiana, the group is working with the Indiana NAACP, Marion County Bar Association, and the James R. Kimbrough Bar Association in northern Indiana to educate Hoosier voters.

Turnout could be higher than normal with this presidential election. Even though Indiana’s voter ID law has been in place for three years, some people still don’t understand they need to have government-issued photo identification with them to vote. This group’s goal is a welcome step to making sure all Indiana residents who are eligible to vote know what they need to do in order to vote this fall. Who knows, Indiana may play an important role in determining who wins this year’s presidential election.
ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. Such things are no more elections than those in the late, unlamented Soviet Union.

  2. It appears the police and prosecutors are allowed to change the rules halfway through the game to suit themselves. I am surprised that the congress has not yet eliminated the right to a trial in cases involving any type of forensic evidence. That would suit their foolish law and order police state views. I say we eliminate the statute of limitations for crimes committed by members of congress and other government employees. Of course they would never do that. They are all corrupt cowards!!!

  3. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  4. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  5. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

ADVERTISEMENT