Remember this comment contained below from constitutional conservative Pennsylvania State Rep. Daryl Metcalfe:
The fact that the law may impose a burden on voters who need an ID "doesn't give you a reason to (disregard) the voice of the people" as expressed by the Legislature, he said.
Metcalfe is saying that no matter how unconstitutional something is, if elected politicians supposedly reflect the “voice of the people,” who cares.
Republican authoritarian rule. Despite the “strict” conservative adherence to the constitution, some things can still be a fair and reasonable exception.
AP: A Pennsylvania judge on Friday struck down a requirement that nearly all of the state's 8.2 million voters show photo identification at the polls, saying it imposes an unreasonable burden on the right to vote and that officials failed to demonstrate the need for it. "Voting laws are designed to assure a free and fair election; the Voter ID Law does not further this goal….overwhelming evidence" that hundreds of thousands of qualified voters lack IDs that comply with the law and panned the state's educational and marketing efforts as "largely ineffective and consistently confusing."
And so we return to Metcalfe’s lunatic ranting’s of judicial activism, especially when rulings don’t go the GOP’s way (a dangerous precedent repeated over and over by conservatives):
Rep. Daryl D. Metcalfe, a Butler County Republican who sponsored the original, more stringent bill, called the decision "an activist ruling by a partisan Democrat judge." The fact that the law may impose a burden on voters who need an ID "doesn't give you a reason to (disregard) the voice of the people" as expressed by the Legislature, he said.
Yes, if the people (how many, and what party) want it, what does the constitution matter.