A Devious Plot Or Just Common Sense...

In 2004, Arizona voters approved Proposition 200, a measure designed to prevent illegal immigrants from voting. It required people to produce proof of citizenship, such as a passport, to register to vote, and picture ID, such as a driver's license, or two pieces of a nonphoto ID, in order to cast a ballot.

This law has been tossed around in the courts since then. SCOTUS has just allowed the law to stand. So the question is, does it disenfranchise voters, in particular, those that are poor and may not have proof of citizenship or does this just make good old common sense given that there are probably around 10 million illegal immigrants in the US these days?

The SCOTUS decision, while not opining on the validity of the law itself, did not disallow it in the context of the court processes to date. But most heartening to me, it weighed the idea that disenfranchised voters, those without sufficient ID to vote being a legitimate problem with another legitimate problem that all voters are disenfranchised and may be discouraged to vote if elections are subject to or potentially fraudulent when there is a belief that there could be a significant number of illegitimate voters.