The potential disenfranchisment of hundreds of thousands of people just isn't that big of a deal. There will be an appeal, but with the state supreme court split 3-3, I doubt such a challenge will succeed. There is a potential for the Federal Government to step in under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, but I think that is a long shot as well.
Your papers please. And no, that's not a request, in Pennsylvania, it is now a demand in order to exercise your rights as a citizen. The erosion continues.
UPDATE: The NYT blasts the decision:
He wrote in his ruling that requiring a government-issued photo ID card to vote “is a reasonable, nondiscriminatory, nonsevere burden when viewed in the broader context of the widespread use of photo ID in daily life,” as if voting were equivalent to buying a six-pack of beer or driving a car....
The real reasons for voter ID laws are quite clear. The desire to dampen the Democratic vote after 2006 — and particularly in the wake of President Obama’s election — prompted six states to decide, virtually simultaneously, to pass voter ID laws. Their stated reason — combating voter fraud — is easily dismissed because there are virtually no documented cases of impersonation fraud that could be reduced with an ID card...
The voter ID requirement does not specifically single out any class or group and applies uniformly to all, he wrote. But what Republicans know, and what the judge should have realized, was that many voters won’t be able to participate in the democratic process any longer. Some won’t show up at the polls, unwilling to leap the hurdle placed before them, while others will try to vote and find their ballots rejected. This lawsuit was an opportunity to sweep away barriers to full citizenship. Judge Simpson should have placed his court on record supporting the country’s first principles.
That is the polite way of saying the judge fucked up. Unfortunatly, Simpson isn't up for a retention vote for a decade. By then, this absurd ruling will be forgotten.