The level of scrutiny applied in an equal protection analysis of poverty depends on the role of poverty in the discrimination. If we are talking about family relationships or treatment in the criminal justice system, the Supreme Court expects the state to show it has a compelling interest in treating the poor differently. If it is a civil matter, however, plaintiff must show that the state has no rational basis for its treatment, i.e. state wins almost every time. The same rational basis standard applies to age discrimination.

However, the right to vote is a fundamental right, so what I think Christian Sande is saying here is that, taken together, strict scrutiny would apply to a requirement that the voter produce a photo ID to be able to vote. The state would have to overcome the discriminatory effect, say, by providing photo IDs to all at no cost and replacing the expiring driver’s licenses of elderly people automatically with photo IDs. That would leave a very small group of seniors who never held driver’s licenses needing some special arrangement. All that for a crappy card that might help (or not) at the liquor store and getting travel discounts, with a tangential effect on voting. Thinking it through, a special photo ID for voting is a pretty dumb idea. What is a good ID? In Finland, for example, you start with a social security number that includes your date of birth. You can then put that on your scannable and secure polycarbonate national health insurance card.

Unfortunately, an overreliance on “process” here has made it appear that neither the Senate Dems nor Mr. Franken himself is particularly concerned with the matter at issue, that is representing the People of Minnesota. The Senate Dems appear to be completely disinterested in the matter, and Mr. Franken appears to be so caught up in the process, the dispute as it were, that he seems to be content to let it drag on indefinitely. It’s as if his dispute with Mr. Coleman has become an end in itself. Which is why I call it a soap opera.

Of course it may appear very different to Minnesotans. They may be just fine with the way things are going, the slow and plodding pace, the endless rehashing of the same bitter arguments. The dénouement possibly forever put off…

I’ll stop before this becomes a segment of “A Prairie Home Companion….”

Yes it is very slow and deliberate — but that is because every element of the process is written into state Statute Law. I would agree the system could work with slightly more urgency, but the point of it all is to simply count all legal votes, and then make the award to the guy with the most at the end of the process. And the appeal to the State Supreme Court is the end of the process.

And this is why it really isn’t a soap opera. The Republicans would love for it to have been scripted that way, but from Day One, Franken and his legal team have treated it as a serious judicial process. Thus all the more ironic that during oral arguments the most conservative judges on the bench noted that Coleman, after all these months, had no evidence backing up his claims. I don’t think the court will be at all kind to Coleman in their opinion — I think they were insulted by the empty argument.

My sense is the opinion will come down late next week — perhaps even sooner. I don’t think there is much division among the justices, and since they have had two weeks plus three weekends with the briefs before the oral argument, I would even guess they have considerable parts of their opinion in draft form, and what is left to write involves the questions they asked. Franken has already requested in briefs a direct order to the Governor to execute the election certificate — and I would not be surprised at all if they append that to their opinion. Since their first brush with this case last November when Franken asked under public information laws for access to election records, the court has carefully followed existing law and precidents. I think now they want to dispose of it — their patience and that of many here abouts is nearing the end.

What’s so galling about this soap opera is the utter absence of urgency on the part of Franken and the Senate Dems. They seem completely content to let this matter continue indefinitely, which I don’t understand at all. Franken should have been sworn in as a Senator months ago, but at the rate things are going — and the apparent languid indifference of the Senate Democrats — it could be months more or even years before all the possible complications are ironed out sufficiently for Franken to take his seat in the Senate.

Senate Dems showed a lot more interest in getting Burris seated… but they seem content to let this Franken Thing go on without a resolution for just as long as it wants to.

I’d like to see Tim-a-fee-pawlunty (destroyer of bridges) go ahead and refuse to sign as you suggest. Then I’d like Happless Harry to do nothing–nothing visible in this avenue, anyway. I’d prefer to think he could better spend his energy NOT fighting the media and the collective echo chamber of nonsense; rather, I’d like to think he is actually leader of the Senate for a reason and, as such, would take this opportunity to leverage more moderate Republicans to support the President’s agenda, making the Franken vote a moot point, belabored only by the lizard brains and their talking heads.

Then, I’d love to see Al Franken go on tour as the famously NON-Seated Senator from Minnesota–pulling out all the stops on his backlog of wit and satire; becoming a lightning rod for the “big fat liar” and his ilk–indeed, courting and engaging their ire and attention. Let Al be highly vocal on what his vote WOULD have been in any particular circumstance and let that juxtaposition draw a huge, flaming, red circle around the fact that another Republican gambit is circumventing the law of the land for each and every vote that he misses. Let the Limpbaw, the Gingrinch, whomever…rail against Al in his unassailable position of non-positionness. Then, watch as Al Franken continues on the public circuit, to eviscerate those enemies as only a very gifted satirist can. Satire does not become a sitting Senator, it is true; but, I think it very much becomes an ironically non-sitting Senator. In fact, I think it is very much called for.

At his press conference today, Pawlenty said he is “going to do whatever the court says” regarding signing an election certificate, though it remains unclear whether he will be directed to do so if Franken wins.

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2…..6634.shtml

It is some slight consolation that the jerk will be gone in less than two years. Good frickin’ ridance.

They could get rid of him earlier than that with a recall election. Just sayin’…