Question

Justice John Paul Stevens did, in fact, write the majority opinion to uphold the Indiana Voter ID law in the case of Crawford v. Marion County Election Board. He outlined several reasons to support the decision. However, the specific details of his arguments may not be universally agreed upon. Nevertheless, here's a multiple-choice question based on the general principles involved:

Which of the following was NOT offered as proof by Justice Stevens to support the Supreme Court's decision to uphold the Indiana Voter ID law in the case of Crawford v. Marion County Election Board?

A) The state's interest in preventing voter fraud.
B) The availability of free IDs to those without them.
C) The impact of the law on minority voters.
D) The need for maintaining public confidence in the election process.

Answer 1

The argument NOT used by Justice Stevens in the majority opinion for the Supreme Court to uphold the Indiana Voter ID law in Crawford v. Marion County Election Board was 'The impact of the law on minority voters.' The correct answer is C).

Step-by-step explanation:

The question concerns which argument was NOT used by Justice Stevens in the majority opinion for the Supreme Court in the case of Crawford v. Marion County Election Board to uphold the Indiana Voter ID law. The choices given to identify the incorrect argument were A) The state's interest in preventing voter fraud, B) The availability of free IDs to those without them, C) The impact of the law on minority voters, and D) The need for maintaining public confidence in the election process.

Justice Stevens in his majority opinion emphasized the state's interest in preventing voter fraud and the need for maintaining public confidence in the electoral process as grounds for upholding the law (Crawford v. Marion County Election Board, 553 U.S. 181 (2008)). Furthermore, he acknowledged the availability of free IDs for voters who did not have them. However, he did not cite the impact of the law on minority voters as a supporting argument, which critics and opponents have often argued leads to disproportionate effects on minorities and the poor and can inhibit their right to vote. As such, the correct answer is C) The impact of the law on minority voters.