Chapter 12

1)
Congress can address the issues in the scenario by passing federal laws that outlaw ID
requirements for voting or they could create an Amendment that makes the requirement
unconstitutional.

In the case of the law mentioned in part A, state legislatures could claim the law is
unconstitutional as it violates the 10th Amendment and sue the federal government. For the
amendment power, state legislatures would be required to ratify the amendment for it to pass,
so they have the chance to block the measure.

In the context of the scenario, voter ID laws will decrease democratic representation as groups
are turned away from the polls and their right to vote is not heard, so they have no direct
representation.

2)
Michigan requests a photo ID but is not strict on the requirement as they allow other forms of
ID.

For the most part, the strictest ID laws are in the Southeast as most states in this region require
or request photo ID- albeit with varied degrees of strictness. States on the east and west coasts
have either no ID requirement or looser laws. This divide illustrates an ideological one as the
regions with strict laws are largely conservative while the loose laws are liberal-leaning.

The laws shown in the graphic illustrate the states’ rights principle of federalism. The right of
states to make their own laws is a bedrock idea from federalism.

3)
The constitutional clause in both Minor v. Happersett and Brown v. Board of Education is the
14th Amendment’s equal protection clause which declares that all citizens must be equally
protected under the law.

As mentioned in part A, the equal protections clause guarantees equal protections for citizens
under the law. With that in mind, the Court decided in Brown v. Board of Education that
segregated schools harmed African Americans and deprived them of a right. In Minor v.
Happerset, however, the Court found that women were not being deprived of any right
because they were not citizens and were not subject to the clause.

After the defeat, suffrage supporters could write letters to Congress, organize marches and
protests, continue to file lawsuits, spread information through pamphlets, and continue to push
for state laws or a constitutional amendment to grant women suffrage.
 Chapter 12

4) Should voting be mandatory in the United States?

Though would increase participation in democracy, voting should not be required in the
United States because it violates individual liberties and freedom of speech.

People have an inherent right to choose what they may do. It’s not explicitly mentioned,
but it is a right which can be derived from the 9th Amendment which states that any rights not
specifically mentioned can be assumed by the people and cannot be abridged by the federal
government. Furthermore, the Supreme Court of the United States has interpreted a right to
privacy from amendments- including the 9th- which would surely be violated by a government
compelling choice from the people.

This also brings the nation frighteningly close to tyranny. It’s a fear which was described
at length in Brutus no. 1: a federal government which is given too much power, can push
citizens around, and becomes a dictatorship. By forcing people to vote, we would be
establishing that the government can compel action and inherently inaction from citizens.

Others may argue that compelling people to vote ensures a more fair democracy in
which every voice is heard. However, this implies that those who are not voting are not making
their voices heard. Those who choose not to vote are ultimately using their 1 st Amendment
right to free speech and expression by refusing to participate in a system which they may view
as unfair or broken. By requiring a vote out of these people, the government would be taking
away their form of expression and demanding they behave in a specific way which oversteps
governmental powers and abuses the rights of the people.