I know that, as someone who’s generally pretty progressive, I’m supposed to be outraged that the Supreme Court has just ruled in favor of an Indiana law mandating that voters have some form of ID. Historically, such laws have been used to intimidate minority and older voters.

But I can’t get that worked up about the law, simply because it doesn’t seem like an unreasonable requirement—as long as the definition of an ID is broad.

I’m always surprised when I walk into my voting station, in a Harlem housing project, and they don’t ask me for ID.

On the other hand, this is absurd:

Lawyers who challenged the case cited the experience of one would-be Indiana voter, Valerie Williams, who was turned away from the polling place in November 2006 by officials who told her that a telephone bill, a Social Security letter with her address and an expired driver’s license were no longer sufficient.

Ms. Williams, ironically, is Republican.