Continued from page 1

Hmm. That’s a bit on the straightforward side. I wonder how the ACLU, if given the chance, would summarize Obamacare if that 2,700-page monstrosity of a law were reduced to a ballot measure? Think it would leave out a few things?

I don’t think it’s all that complicated, and I hereby submit this sample ballot language: “Obamacare nationalizes the entire health care system and reduces U.S. citizens to government subjects. Vote yes or no.” But I digress.

In its brief, the ACLU argues that the law would impose “the strictest voter identification requirements in the nation” and that “it would enshrine these requirements in the Minnesota Constitution.”

The ACLU also complains that the requirement for all voters to show “substantially equivalent identity and eligibility verification” before voting “is so vague that it is anyone’s guess what effect it will ultimately have on Minnesota’s voting system.” Such as reducing the number of voters who are unqualified, illegal or dead?

This is the same ACLU, remember, that has no problem with vagueness when adding the infinitely elastic term “sexual orientation” to civil rights and “hate crime” laws in order to advance a radical political agenda that someday will criminalize the Boy Scouts, Christianity and Orthodox Judaism, if fully implemented. One man’s vagueness is another man’s legal hammer.

The Minnesota Supreme Court is expected to rule on the photo ID measure by Labor Day, in time for the state to print the question — or not — on the Nov. 6 ballot.

Perhaps Minnesotans will be allowed to curb vote fraud in time for Al Franken’s re-election try in 2014. It won’t be as interesting, but it might produce a more honest election.

Robert Knight is senior fellow for the American Civil Rights Union and a columnist for The Washington Times.