> Nothing you said here is true, why are you saying this? Parties can, and regularly do, challenge voter roles, make them appear in person and prove their citizenship and identity[0]

No--that's proving residence. I said they can't require voters to prove their citizenship. [1]

I didn't say parties can't challenge voter rolls, either.

> If it makes you feel better, I don't believe that these Republicans are racist, I just think they implement racist laws because blacks largely vote democratic and they'd rather suppress them than actually do the hard work of outreach. But alas, it's largely useless to try and separate their intent from their actions - the end result is that they are seeking to disenfranchise voters based on their skin colors.

That may be true. I'm not a Republican, though, so it seems unfair to dismiss my arguments based on unrelated actions. Some of them probably are legitimately racist, but that doesn't mean we should turn a blind eye to verifiable potential for voter fraud.

I'll go as far as to say that some degree voter fraud is likely acceptable and expected in a system that strives to ensure nobody is hindered in their exercise of voting. Any inconvenience is going to turn people away and you can't possibly verify any more rigorously without adding inconvenience. The discussion is in where the line is.

[1] http://www.politico.com/blogs/under-the-radar/2016/02/feds-b...