Supreme Court upholds voter ID again

For many reasons, mostly political but partly ethical, I do not use Google, Facebook, Twitter. They practice corrupt business policies, while targeting conservative websites for censoring, facts repeatedly confirmed by news stories and by my sense that Facebook has taken action to prevent my readers from recommending Behind the Black to their friends.
Thus, I must have your direct support to keep this webpage alive. Not only does the money pay the bills, it gives me the freedom to speak honestly about science and culture, instead of being forced to write it as others demand.


Please consider donating by giving either a one-time contribution or a regular subscription, as outlined in the tip jar below.


Regular readers can support Behind The Black with a contribution via paypal:

Or with a subscription with regular donations from your Paypal or credit card account:

If Paypal doesn't work for you, you can support Behind The Black directly by sending your donation by check, payable to Robert Zimmerman, to
Behind The Black
c/o Robert Zimmerman
P.O.Box 1262
Cortaro, AZ 85652


You can also support me by buying one of my books, as noted in the boxes interspersed throughout the webpage. And if you buy the books through the ebookit links, I get a larger cut and I get it sooner.

The Supreme Court today turned down a challenge to Wisconsin’s new voter ID law, essentially allowing it to become fully effective.

This is not the first time the court has upheld voter ID. Moreover, the decision today is another political victory for Scott Walker, who pushed the legislation through, and a defeat for Democrats and the left, which for some reason fear a system that will make sure voter fraud is difficult if not impossible.



  • geoffc

    Goodness, a conservative who can win, and has won, and continues to win. What will they think of next?

  • Chris Kirkendall

    The Dems/Libs claim that a) there’s really not much voter fraud, so there’s no reason to address it, b) both parties are equally guilty of it, so it’s a wash anyway, and c) it prevents minorities from voting. All three points are easily destroyed with even the most basic logical analysis.

    James O’Keefe has repeatedly shown how easy it is to commit vote fraud & how prevalent it is, utterly destroying a). We also saw in the 2012 election literally hundreds of examples of Democrat counties & precincts in OH, PA & other states where the voter turnout was OVER 100% – clearly an impossibility unless there was massive fraud. Argument a)? Don’t make me laugh !!

    As for b) – if both parties are equally guilty of vote fraud, why are virtually 100% of Dems opposed to stopping it & 100% of GOPers/ Conservatives support measures to stop it? Would GOPers want to stop something they benefit from? Of course not! Obviously, Dems DO benefit from vote fraud, and that’s why they oppose any effort to defeat it – so much for argument b)!

    As for c) – these minority voters that supposedly have so much difficulty obtaining a photo ID nevertheless have jobs, drive cars, board airplanes and buy liquor – all of which require some form of photo ID, obliterating that argument as well.

    The bottom line is Photo ID does NOT prevent LEGAL voters from voting – it only prevents ILLEGAL ones from voting. It’s encouraging that – finally – the USSC has upheld a good law.

    Final thought: You can always tell who benefits from a policy or law & who doesn’t by who supports or opposes it…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *