United States Attorney General Eric Holder announced Monday that the Justice Department would take action to prevent North Carolina from enacting requirements for voters to produce identification in order to cast a ballot in elections. Once again, the Obama administration is playing fast and loose with US law; deciding, arbitrarily, which laws it likes and which it doesn’t. There is a case to be made for equality, however, if it is to be determined that a law requiring a person to produce ID is discriminatory.
US citizens and residents are required to show identification for numerous reasons; boarding a plane, checking into a hotel, registering a motor vehicle, opening a bank account and buying a firearm, among other activities that are all a normal part of everyday life. Surely, if demanding identification at the polling station amounts to discrimination, then that applies, also, at the airport, the hotel, the DMV, the bank and the gun store.
The argument is that the poor and ethnic minorities are disadvantaged, as they are less likely to possess a valid ID. The entire premise is, of course, the reddest of herrings; the Democratic Party is interested only in ensuring that illegal immigrants will be able to vote for the Democratic Party.
If one is not required to show ID when exercising one of the most fundamental – and important – individual rights, the right to cast a vote, then, in the interests of fairness and equality, one should not be required to produce an ID for any other activity. Every law-abiding citizen of legal age has the right to purchase a firearm. Having to produce an ID in order to complete that transaction is, surely, racist and/or discriminatory. Why, in this modern and, supposedly, enlightened society, are we preventing the poor and minorities from opening bank accounts, registering their cars, checking into a hotel or exercising their Second Amendment rights?
There is no distinction between any laws or regulations which require the showing of identification; if it unjust at the polling station, then it is unjust everywhere. Clearly, all requirements for showing ID should be dispensed with. Is it fair to prevent a Latino from boarding a plane to take a vacation or visit distant relatives? Is it fair to refuse to allow a poor person to register their truck? Is it right that a black man – or woman – not be allowed to purchase a handgun, because they are being asked to produce an ID which, according to Eric Holder, they may not have?
What, then, is the answer? Will all persons of color be exempt from identifying themselves whilst all white people are still required to produce an ID? Will only those who appear to be poor be allowed to go through life without ever having to prove who they are?
If the Justice Department is to take its stance on ID laws to its logical conclusion, then the case for equality demands that law enforcement officers no longer be allowed to ask someone to show identification. A driver’s license is, apparently, a component of slavery; there is a logical case to be made for the complete repeal of any and all laws and regulations which require a person to show ID. There is, therefore, no longer a requirement for states to maintain Motor Vehicle Departments. Since it is now discriminatory to require anyone to prove their identity – and, therefore, it is now impossible for anyone to prove that they are the legal owners of anything or that they are responsible for anything – the United States can dispense with all forms of insurance, all documentation of ownership, all contractual agreements and every other mechanism of society and commerce that relies upon anyone proving that they are who they say they are.
That, of course, may be exactly what the Marxists who are now running the country are ultimately aiming for.
An op/ed by Graham J Noble