Do we fully understand what the discussion was about with Scalia?
The law under discussion limited the racial discrimination provisions to a few states where suppression of the black vote had been a serious problem. Other states are not mentioned. Further, the law only refers to blacks ... does not include Latino, Asian, etc. So, if we have laws which guarantee the right to vote to everyone, have the narrow specifications of this particular law now lost their significance. IF we really need a law to iterate the guarantee of the right to vote, wouldn't it really need a law that is more inclusive?
And this law is not the same thing as the voter ID discussion. Voter ID would not discriminate against anyone. The ID law here in PA was put in place prior to the POTUS election in 2012, but it was not required in the 2012 election. So, the state is allowing very ample time for acquiring ID for everyone, and there is a strong effort to make it possible for EVERYone to acquire the ID in the interim.
At our own voting station, I have noted vans that bring nursing home residents and disabled persons to the voting station. With the ample time allowed by our state, would this model not also be used to get these people their voting ID? For homebound elderly and handicapped, there is also publicly provided transportation that is scheduled at the user's convenience ... door-to-door. State and Federal representatives are also offering voters the opportunity to call their offices if they have transportation problems in acquiring the ID. Basically, unless you are living under a rock or in a coma, everyone should be able to get their voter ID in advance of the requirement going into effect.