Early Voting Case Study

Nearly every state has its own qualifications and requirements concerning who can vote and under what circumstances. For example, Maryland voters must only present identification if they have never voted before and if they did not register in person, while Californian voters are not required to show any form of identification to vote. These qualifications are primarily decided by the state, with general guidelines being provided by the Constitution and the federal government. However, in certain situations, the federal government must intervene to determine the constitutionality of a certain law. In the beginning, the United States Constitution had no restrictions on who could vote; the states decided individually what the requirements for voting would be. The majority of states only allowed white males who owned property or who had income that could be taxed to vote, but several northern jurisdictions let women and non-whites who owned property vote.

District Judge Nelva Gonzales Ramos. She stated, much like Democrats who opposed the law, that it was discriminatory against minorities such as African-Americans and Hispanics who were without the proper identification required to vote. However, the state of Texas appealed the judge’s decision in time to use the law at the polls next month, and supporters of the bill were rightfully confident that the decision of Judge Ramos will be overturned. This confidence was the result of the bill being ruled constitutional earlier this month by the U.S. Supreme Court, and, again, the Court ruled that the law was constitutional just in time for the election. The opinion of Judge Ramos was reached on the same day that a similar law was stopped in Wisconsin. At this time, residents of Wisconsin don’t need to show photo identification, and instead only need to show proof of residence before they are allowed to