Wisconsin Voter ID Law Rejected By Federal Judge

[Mayhem]

A federal judge in Milwaukee struck down Wisconsin's voter identification law Tuesday, declaring that a requirement that voters show a state-issued photo ID at the polls imposes an unfair burden on poor and minority voters.

U.S. District Judge Lynn Adelman sided with opponents of the law, who argued that low-income and minority voters aren't as likely to have photo IDs or the documents needed to get them. Adelman said the law violated the U.S. Constitution's guarantee of equal protection. He also said the law appeared too flawed to be fixed by legislative amendments.

Adelman's decision invalidates Wisconsin's law and means voter ID likely won't be in place for the fall elections, when Republican Gov. Scott Walker faces re-election. While Walker last month committed to calling a special legislative session if the law were struck down in court, his spokeswoman wouldn't commit to that Tuesday.

"We believe the voter ID law is constitutional and will ultimately be upheld," Walker spokeswoman Laurel Patrick said in an email. "We're reviewing the decision for any potential action."

The ruling could set a precedent for similar legal challenges in Texas, North Carolina and elsewhere. There are 31 states with laws in effect requiring voters to show some form of identification, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Seven states have strict photo ID requirements similar to the one a state judge struck down in Arkansas last week; that decision has been appealed to the Arkansas Supreme Court. Pennsylvania's voter ID law has been put on hold because of court challenges.

Earlier this month, President Barack Obama waded into the voter ID debate, accusing Republicans of using restrictions to keep voters from the polls and jeopardizing 50 years of expanded voting access for millions of black Americans and other minorities.

A Dane County judge had already blocked Wisconsin's law in state court. The state Supreme Court heard arguments in two separate lawsuits in February, although it's not clear when the justices will issue a ruling. For voter ID to be reinstated, the state's high court would have to rule that it doesn't violate the state constitution, and Adelman's decision would have to be overturned on appeal.




Wisconsin's Department of Justice, which defended the state law in court, pledged to continue the fight.

"I am disappointed with the order and continue to believe Wisconsin's law is constitutional," Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen said in a statement. "We will appeal."

Republican backers had argued that requiring voters to show ID would cut down on voter fraud and boost public confidence in the integrity of the election process. But Adelman said the state failed to prove that voter fraud is a legitimate problem.

"(V)irtually no voter impersonation occurs in Wisconsin and it is exceedingly unlikely that voter impersonation will become a problem in Wisconsin in the foreseeable future," he wrote in a 90-page opinion.

Wisconsin's Republican-led Legislature passed the photo ID requirement in 2011, scoring a long-sought GOP priority. Former Gov. Jim Doyle, a Democrat, had vetoed a similar requirement three times between 2002 and 2005.

Wisconsin's law was only in effect for a 2012 primary before a Dane County judge declared it unconstitutional.

Adelman pledged to expedite any proceedings should Wisconsin's Legislature attempt to amend the law, but he also had strong cautionary words for lawmakers.

"Given the evidence presented at trial showing that Blacks and Latinos are more likely than whites to lack an ID, it is difficult to see how an amendment to the photo ID requirement could remove its disproportionate racial impact and discriminatory result," Adelman wrote.

Wisconsin residents can get a free state ID from a Department of Motor Vehicles by presenting documents such as a certified birth certificate, passport or Social Security card. Each document must be unexpired, and the person's name must be spelled identically on each document.

A number of witnesses testified the regulation was a problem, either because their names were misspelled on a key document or because they were born in rural areas during an era when birth certificates weren't always issued.

Adelman cited their testimony in his ruling, noting that they faced challenges that could deter them from voting.

"Although not every voter will face all of these obstacles, many voters will face some of them, particularly those who are low-income," the judge wrote.

The federal challenge combined two separate cases. One was brought by minority-rights groups, including the Wisconsin chapter of the League of United Latin American Citizens, and the other involved the American Civil Liberties Union and the Washington, D.C.-based Advancement Project.

ACLU spokesman Dale Ho said his group was "ecstatic" over the victory, and felt Adelman rendered a fair assessment of the evidence.

"We're pleased. We feel vindicated by the judge's decision," he said.

Booyah!!! All it takes is the first court case. The rest will now fall like dominoes.

It occurs to me that the only thing getting in the way of a pretty good nation is the bullshit Supreme Court.

 

[bobjustbob]

I will never, ever, EVER cave into this photo ID voting shit. Voter registration requires only something as simple as a piece of mail addressed to you and your signature swearing that you are a citizen. Lying about this on your voter registration can throw you in jail. Match that signature from the registration to the voting booth and that's it. I sign my name into a book every time I vote and it is checked from previous times I signed to vote. What do they think I'm going to do? Register into 9 different congressional districts and spend my whole fucking day canvasing the state just to vote 9 times?

 

[Ace Boobtoucher]

One of the main arguments against voter ID laws in question is the fear that such laws would prevent a large number of poor and minority citizens from being able to vote. Opponents of the laws claim that the laws would disenfranchise the poorest of Americans, because they are unable to afford the time to vote, or pay the fees required to acquire the needed identification. The secondary argument against voter identification laws is that they are racist, as they discriminate against minorities.

One must only think about how often an ID is required in modern life, to realize the first argument does not have a strong basis.

Listed below are the functions of modern life that require photo identification:

You must have I.D. to:

Operate a vehicle
Purchase alcohol (weed, too. In WA and CO)
Get on a commercial flight
gain admittance to an R rated movie (to be honest, this has never happened to me)
Purchase a handgun
Properly file a w-9 form
collect social security
vote in UNION ELECTIONS
purchase items with a credit card (sometimes)
Cash a check
Gamble
Pick up certain prescriptions
sell anything at a pawn shop
take the SATs and the AP tests
rent an apartment
purchase tobacco (again, never happened to me, even when I was 16)
Rent a car
apply for a permit to hold or attend a protest or rally
visit any k-12 school
enter any government building (even the dept of justice)


Are these everyday requirements for a photo ID racist or prejudiced against the poor? It is difficult to justify any claims of a racist basis for ID laws, as race does not figure in the ability to obtain an ID. Even using the weak argument of cost, there are far fewer minorities below the poverty level than there are among the Caucasian majority.

The only thing racist about voter ID laws are the progressive asshats who believe minority people are too lazy/poor/stupid to obtain proper identification.


post img

 

[Will E Worm]

I agree with Ace.

Too many IDs for everything else, except something we need them for.

Just like everyone should have to show proof of insurance before they get their drivers license.

If not, no one should have to have insurance.

Even though driver's license aren't legal. :tongue:

 

[MustBeGood]

The real deal.

The Latest Lie in the Push For Voter ID Restrictions

BRENTIN MOCK NOVEMBER 25, 2013

The debate around voter ID law in Wisconsin is representative of whether elected officials can understand the true costs and burdens of being poor, black, and brown in America.

To the Republican supporters of laws that would treat the poll booth like an exclusive nightclub that asks for photo ID and other qualifications before allowing entry, the answer to why anyone would oppose this is simple: They must not want to vote badly enough.



This was the logic for Wisconsin State Senator Glenn Grothman who last week on MSNBC said, "I really don't think they care that much about voting in the first place, right?" in response to a question about how African-American voters might be impacted by voter ID and early voting cuts.

This is not anomalous thinking among Republicans. Similar comments have been made by Republican state legislators in Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Florida. In fact, they say these things so often publicly that you have to wonder if it’s some kind of dog-whistle to the more racially polarized portion of their voting base.

The idea that people of color don't "care" about voting ignores how expensive it can be to meet the qualifications of voter ID laws to begin with. Those expenses are irrelevant only to those who can easily meet them. On Friday November 15th, a federal court trial over Wisconsin’s voter ID law concluded after two weeks of testimony from at least a dozen state residents illustrating how difficult it’s been to obtain the photo ID needed to vote. It also featured the testimony of state government officials who dismissed those residents’ burdens as easily surmountable.



The idea that people of color don't "care" about voting ignores how expensive it can be to meet the qualifications of voter ID laws to begin with. Those expenses are irrelevant only to those who can easily meet them. On Friday November 15th, a federal court trial over Wisconsin’s voter ID law concluded after two weeks of testimony from at least a dozen state residents illustrating how difficult it’s been to obtain the photo ID needed to vote. It also featured the testimony of state government officials who dismissed those residents’ burdens as easily surmountable.

The question of who’s right in that tug of war comes down to careful consideration of the racial and class contexts of the law. If you are a white male with a government job, you obviously are in tune enough with the law, and have the resources to meet it. But if you are not that … well consider the statistics:

78 percent of African-American men in Wisconsin between the ages of 18 and 24 do not have a driver’s license

66 percent of young African-American women in the same age range lack a driver’s license

57 percent of young Latino men aged 18 to 24, and 63 percent of young Latinas lack driver’s licenses

During the Wisconsin trial, statistician Leland Beatty testified that more than 300,000 registered Wisconsin voters did not have a driver’s license or state ID card in 2012—16.2 percent of them African-American registered voters compared to just 9.5 percent of registered white voters. For Latinos, over 24 percent lacked a driver’s license or state ID card. Beatty analyzed the same data for 2013 and found the same racial disparate impact.

The burden suffered by people of color in Wisconsin under a voter ID law is not an academic exercise in statistics, though. Real Wisconsin residents testified about how hard it is to comply with the law—a law unnecessary given the state went hundreds of years without it and yet still managed to earn the top score in election performance by the Pew Research Center last year. Despite that, the expenses that come along with the voter ID law were laid bare during the November trial, which is the first litigation that has happened under the Voting Rights Act’s Section Two since the U.S. Supreme Court gutted the civil rights law this summer.

Lorene Hutchins, a 93-year-old, African-American woman born in Mississippi was able to retrieve her birth certificate from her home state only after her daughter Katherine Clark helped her through the arduous process. It cost them over $2,000 in expenses and legal fees to do so.

Ray Ciszewski, a volunteer for his church’s program that helps the homeless and those recently released from prison obtain birth certificates for jobs, and lately to vote, testified that it costs on average $20 for a Wisconsin birth certificate. Roughly 23 percent of the people he’s tried to help were unable to get their birth certificates for a number of reasons, he said during the trial.

Carmen Cabrera of the Latino non-profit Centro Hispano Milwaukee testified that many of their members encountered language barriers—in particular, a limited availability of Spanish-speaking DMV clerks—when they help them get state IDs. Not to mention, there’s limited access to the DMV offices around the state since most of them are open only on weekdays and close at 4:30 p.m. Anytime voters have to take time off from work or school to haggle with DMV operators, especially those who don’t speak their language, that is a cost voters have to bare.

Attorney General Kawski called these plaintiffs' experiences "uncommon, bizarre and one-of-a-kind exceptions"—again, only bizarre to those who privileged enough to not have to deal with the every day struggles of people of color and low income.

I encountered this same dynamic last year while covering the Pennsylvania court trial over its voter ID law, where poor people of color had to prove that they even existed, ID or not. Over two dozen witnesses, mostly black and Latino, provided account after account about how difficult it is for them to transact with the government over ID while state officials responded on the stand by placing those life stories in doubt. That case is still unresolved, pending a judge’s ruling

More stories about the costs and burdens of Wisconsin residents who lack ID are bound to surface. The Wisconsin state supreme court this week decided to hear two other challenges to the voter ID law filed by local NAACP and League of Women Voter chapters. Other Voter ID law challenges are waiting for their day in court in North Carolina and Texas—the latter of which is a protracted court battle that rivals only Wisconsin in terms of time elapsed without resolving the voter ID controversy. Texas's law was stopped last year in federal court under a Voting Rights Act Section 5 challenge. When the Supreme Court invalidated Section Five’s coverage formula, Texas immediately reinstated the law, which ranks at the top of the nation with Wisconsin in terms of its voter restrictions. It is headed back to federal court, this time under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.

The stakes for all of these voter ID trials are not only who may or may not show up to vote in 2014 and 2016, but also whether government officials will finally recognize the true costs and burdens of being poor, black and brown in America as illustrated in these court testimonies. It’s not that they don’t care about voting; it’s that too many obstructions have been placed in their way.

Here is the solution. Two week session to give out FREE id's cards to the ones who need it without the extra cost for the right to vote.

Anything else is just BS voter suppression so the Kochsuckers can finalize their NAZI type of dictatorship style government in Washington, that keeps the influential White Men control over government.

 

[Will E Worm]

Anything else is just BS voter suppression so the Kochsuckers can finalize their NAZI type of dictatorship style government in Washington, that keeps the influential White Men control over government.

:why:

 

[BassPlayerRob]

In my state I don't really get this. It costs $20 to get a photo id in Virginia. If you can't afford $20 for an identification that lasts for TEN FUCKING YEARS, then you can't afford to drive to the poll or take the bus to the poll in the first place now can you?

 

[MustBeGood]

:why:

Because when you go figure from the story above, these voter ID laws are really being pushed by the racist Kochsuckers Bros in hiding.

And these are being pushed in swing states otherwise we would see the same thing in California, New York and Illinois. .

 

[Philbert]

In my state I don't really get this. It costs $20 to get a photo id in Virginia. If you can't afford $20 for an identification that lasts for TEN FUCKING YEARS, then you can't afford to drive to the poll or take the bus to the poll in the first place now can you?

Just like lunch, if there's a need the Lord will provide.
Churches, Homeless Advocates, some Government agencies, and the usual special cost subsidies for the terminally poor to get an ID...
I suspect why so many non-ID holders in so many welfare ghettos is 'cause there are fake IDs easily available, and it's easy to get bogus SS cards, Credit Cards, and a State ID is easy then.

Really, so far after all these years I still haven't heard a real world reason why Voter ID Laws are suppression.
Felons not voting...that's a good thing to many but with so many welfare class types not allowed to vote (felons) just how many no-insurance no-Driver's License minority drivers are also voters? 13? That's voter suppression I like. I'll trade for vote integrity, and give Granny a ride to the free ID place.

Anything else is just BS voter suppression so the Kochsuckers can finalize their NAZI type of dictatorship style government in Washington, that keeps the influential White Men control over government.

:tinhat:

 

[MustBeGood]

Froomkin To Media: Tell People The Truth About Voter ID Laws
By Susie Madrak July 30, 2012 6:00 pm

Dan Froomkin really lets the media establishment have it for not pointing out the nefarious agenda behind voter ID laws. I live in a city where the two local papers have been aggressively covering the issue, but I'm not seeing it on the national

Dan Froomkin really lets the media establishment have it for not pointing out the nefarious agenda behind voter ID laws. I live in a city where the two local papers have been aggressively covering the issue, but I'm not seeing it on the national news. Gee, I wonder if it has anything to do with protecting their own corporate interests?

This is not simply another gratuitously partisan act by the GOP. This is an attack on the very notion of democracy. The voter ID push, along with intimidation of voter registration groups and purges of voter rolls have only one goal: blocking legitimate but probably Democratic voters from exercising their constitutional rights. It is a poll tax with a new twist.



And the pursuit of this goal ostensibly in the name of voter fraud is an outrageous deception that only works if the press is too timid to call it what it really is.



For reporters to treat this issue like just another political squabble is journalistic malpractice. Indeed, relating the debate in value-neutral he-said-she-said language is actively helping spread the lie. After all, calling for someone to show ID before voting doesn’t sound pernicious to most people, even though it is. And raising the bogus issue of voter fraud at all stokes fear.

“Even if you say there is no fraud, all people hear is ‘fraud fraud fraud’,” said Lawrence Norden, a lawyer at the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law.Think about it. If you were covering elections in another country, and one political party was actively trying to limit voting in the name of a problem that objectively didn’t exist, would you hesitate for a moment to call out that tactic — and question that party’s legitimacy? Hardly.

Modern American journalists strive for impartiality, but there is a limit.

Mainstream journalistsshouldn’t be afraid of being accused of taking sides when what they’re doing is standing up for basic constitutional rights. Indeed, the greater danger is that readers condemn them — or even worse, stop paying attention to them — for having no convictions at all, and no moral compass.

The GOP has taken increasingly radical positions, confident that the media’s aversion to taking sides will protect it from too much negative coverage. But failing to call out the voter ID push is like covering the civil rights movements and treating “separate but equal” as if it was said with sincerity.

All reporters should get every candidate they can on the record about the issue of ballot access, make it clear to readers whether those candidates want to make voting easier or harder, and then assert the simple truth that there is no plausible justification for making it more difficult to vote, other than partisan trickery at the expense of the rights of minorities and the poor.

 

[MustBeGood]

NAACP: Bring Photo ID To Protest Photo ID Laws
NAACP guidelines for marchers

 

[MustBeGood]

Sad truth about voter ID - Houston Chronicle

In the clamor from the far right in recent years about rampant voter fraud, it's easy to ignore the fact that voting in Texas and across the country has long been based on the notion that voter laws must encourage participation, not discourage. It's a core requirement for a self-governing society.



Now comes a study from researchers at the University of Massachusetts confirming what was pretty obvious already: The push for tougher ID laws, including the controversial photo ID law that Texas lawmakers passed in 2011, is part of a nationwide strategy on the part of the Republican Party to discourage minority and low-income voting. Never mind that voter impersonation is almost nonexistent.



Political scientist Erin O'Brien and sociologist Keith Bentele, both professors at the University of Massachusetts at Boston concluded that photo identification and other restrictive proposals were more likely to be introduced in states with larger African-American and non-citizen populations and higher minority turnout; that restrictive laws were passed more frequently in states where the proportion of Republicans in the legislature went up or a Republican governor was elected; that increased competitiveness in the state's previous presidential election was associated with more restrictive policy changes in states with larger GOP majorities; and states where minority turnout has increased since the previous presidential election were more likely to pass restrictive legislation.

Texas got though last fall's election with relatively few ID problems, although the 2014 election system is likely to be more of a test. With early primary voting only weeks away, Texans need to be ready with the appropriate ID, even as they make sure that they're not intimidated by those who would prefer they stay at home.

 

[MustBeGood]

Voter ID Is the Real Fraud
By THE EDITORIAL BOARDAPRIL 29, 2014

For the first time since the Supreme Court junked a core provision of the Voting Rights Act in June, a federal court has used the strongest surviving part of the act to strike down a state’s voter-identification law, and, in the process, has set out a detailed road map for upcoming challenges to similar laws around the country.

Supporters of these laws insist they are necessary to prevent fraud at the polls, though such fraud is basically nonexistent. The real point is to deter from the polls significant numbers of Democratic voters, particularly minorities and the poor.



That was the heart of the reasoning by Judge Lynn Adelman of Federal District Court in Milwaukee, who issued an extraordinarily thorough 90-page ruling on Tuesday invalidating Wisconsin’s voter-ID law as a harmful solution in search of an imaginary problem. The law was passed by a Republican-controlled statehouse in 2011 and required that a prospective voter present a government-issued photo ID, like a driver’s license or passport.

“Virtually no voter impersonation occurs in Wisconsin, and it is exceedingly unlikely that voter impersonation will become a problem in Wisconsin in the foreseeable future,” the judge wrote.



“A person would have to be insane to commit voter-impersonation fraud,” he added, pointing to high costs of being prosecuted for that crime compared with the low benefits of casting one additional vote.



On the other hand, the judge found that 300,000 Wisconsin voters, or 9 percent of all registered voters, lack the required ID — more than twice the margin of victory in the most recent election for governor. “A substantial number” of those voters, the judge found, are lower-income and poorly educated residents who face a “unique barrier” to getting the underlying documents needed to obtain a photo ID. Some cannot afford the $20 for a birth certificate; others must spend weeks tracking down documents at government agencies inaccessible by public transportation.

In the end, it was easy for Judge Adelman to find the law unconstitutional under the equal protection clause. “It is absolutely clear,” the judge concluded, that the law “will prevent more legitimate votes from being cast than fraudulent votes.”

Equally important, the judge found that the law also violated Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, which prohibits laws that have a disproportionate impact on minority voters. That’s because those voters are more likely to be poor and undereducated, the judge found, which “is traceable to the effects of discrimination in areas such as education, employment, and housing.”

Until now, Section 2 has been used primarily in redistricting lawsuits, but its application in the voter-ID context gives a potent weapon to challengers of similar laws in Texas and North Carolina. When the Supreme Court upheld Indiana’s ID law in 2008, it found no evidence of actual harm to voters. The Wisconsin ruling is important in part because it shows the power of the testimony of real, everyday people whose right to vote is demonstrably burdened by these laws.

Judges are at last starting to see voter ID for what it is: a concerted political effort by Republicans to keep opponents from the polls. Even former Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens, who wrote the 2008 opinion, now accepts that view as “dead right.” For those still unsure of voter ID’s true nature, Judge Adelman has paved the path.

 

[MustBeGood]

Enough for now.

Conclusion: Voter ID laws are racist and throws poor people under the bus for their rights.

Voter fraud is a myth and the punk ass racist Kochsuckers could take their money for something that helps the poor instead of supporting voter impression.

What a country! With "Stupid Americans" who go along with this obvious attempt to limit votes for one party while they support the new Nazi regime witch is called the Tea Party.

 

[bobjustbob]

As much as I think MBG is a paranoid, tree hugging kook, can someone please tell me where all of this voter fraud is going on? What investigations have been done to produce how many people prosecuted for this crime? I'll agree that everyone should have a photo ID. The reasons are numerous. However, the privilege to vote should be as simple to keep as it needs to be. Register once to keep your name in the book till you move or don't vote in a while. All it should take is a piece of mail. There are even avenues in place if you become homeless to keep your voting privileges current. That's enough. The rhetoric about this is disgusting.

 

[Philbert]

Since the requirements are photo ID -less I could take your electric bill to the polls, vote, go with another person's Water bill and vote in the same or another precinct; then as often as I can get utility bills, or even get fake ones (printing is easy) I can vote. Lots of people can do this, and only get outed if somehow someone catches on. Dead people are regular voters in many precincts, and of course they don't look like their photo ID (but it's not needed).
The system is under fire, after Acorn was found faking registrations and stuff, the writing is on the wall. Photo IDs are a better solution as the system is already in place. Few have no ID; if they need one, it's easy to get; many don't use legal ID for various reasons...they got no biznez voting.
How to tell fake voters are at the polls if no pic ID, at the very least? Much better than nothing.
I don't believe there are very many without any pic ID who are civic enough to vote...and they can easily be accommodated.

 

[Ace Boobtoucher]

Bob weighs in with a thoughtful, coherent post.



























FUCK YOU AND YOUR LOGIC, BOB!

 

[Mayhem]

Bob and I remember a Republican Party that preached more freedom, less government interference and common sense solutions. Voter registration is government interferring with American's basic freedoms while making no sense whatsoever. Again, voter fraud has not come within 1/100th of a percentage point of influencing any election, anywhere. Fuck, we can barely get people to vote legitimately, but the dimbulbs would have us believe that people are running all over town to vote more than once.

Show me a realisic problem, we can get to work on a realistic solution. Show me no problem and act like it's a problem, then you're the problem.

 

[bobjustbob]

Since the requirements are photo ID -less I could take your electric bill to the polls, vote, go with another person's Water bill and vote in the same or another precinct; then as often as I can get utility bills, or even get fake ones (printing is easy) I can vote. Lots of people can do this, and only get outed if somehow someone catches on. Dead people are regular voters in many precincts, and of course they don't look like their photo ID (but it's not needed).
The system is under fire, after Acorn was found faking registrations and stuff, the writing is on the wall. Photo IDs are a better solution as the system is already in place. Few have no ID; if they need one, it's easy to get; many don't use legal ID for various reasons...they got no biznez voting.
How to tell fake voters are at the polls if no pic ID, at the very least? Much better than nothing.
I don't believe there are very many without any pic ID who are civic enough to vote...and they can easily be accommodated.

Easier said than done. First, you don't know if the bill you have stolen is that of a registered voter. If it is, how do you know if I had already voted? The signatures also have to match what is in the book.

 

[zeeblofowl_1969]

In my state I don't really get this. It costs $20 to get a photo id in Virginia. If you can't afford $20 for an identification that lasts for TEN FUCKING YEARS, then you can't afford to drive to the poll or take the bus to the poll in the first place now can you?

Not a valid reason to keep a fellow citizen from voting. Voter fraud is a giant myth, all part of the right wing 'be afraid be very afraid' campaign.