A Commonwealth Court judge has ruled that the photo ID requirement for voting in Pennsylvania is onerous and thrown out the state voter ID law.
We wonder if Commonwealth Court Judge Bernard L. McGinley has ever purchased a pair of slacks and charged them at one of the big-box stores and been asked to produce a photo identification. Would he consider that onerous?
Some people have been asked to produce photo IDs when mailing packages.
Is a driver's license really that exclusive of a photo identification?
The state has gone the extra mile with this law, producing a multimillion-dollar publicity campaign in 2012 and making available a voting-only card to ensure any registered voter who lacks an ID card can get one.
The Corbett administration is reading the ruling before deciding whether to appeal it to the full Commonwealth Court or directly to the state Supreme Court.
We certainly hope it's appealed because the judge or someone from his office should be made to explain why, in 2014, the requirement of a driver's license or other ID to vote is onerous.
They should have to explain why ensuring that everyone voting is under the same requirement and guaranteeing the sanctity of everyone's vote is a bad idea.
We don't want to think a Democratic judge striking down a law engineered by a Republican-controlled Legislature is politically inspired.
But we can't help from having the thought cross our mind.