Today an Indiana Court of Appeals struck down the Indiana law.
So when a Voter ID bill comes under judicial review, we take notice.
In April 2008, the US Supreme Court voted 6-3 to uphold the
“The application of the statute to the vast majority of
voters is amply justified by the valid interest in protecting the integrity and reliability of the electoral process.” Indiana
That notwithstanding, the League of Women Voters challenged the law under a new argument, the argument being a local one.
“The three-judge panel unanimously held that the requirement that voters present government-issued photo identification at the polls runs afoul of the Indiana Constitution's ‘Equal Privileges and Immunities Clause,’ which provides: ‘The General Assembly shall not grant to any citizen, or class of citizens, privileges or immunities which, upon the same terms, shall not equally belong to all citizens.’”
The argument goes that since the decision is a result of a judicial review of the law based on state-based claims, that the law flouts the state’s constitution, that the US Supreme Court cannot review the ruling of the Court of Appeals.
Such as requiring absentee voters also to provide proof of identity and requiring residents of a state-licensed care facility to provide proof identity, even though the polling place is in their care facility.
These were the two exceptions that were cited by the League of Women’s Voters that provided an “unequal privilege and immunity” in
So really, this doesn’t do a thing for us in
I also suspect that the US Supreme Court will look askance on the view that this decision cannot be ruled on by the federal court, and therefore overturned. It is, after all, a court that was appointed by largely Republican presidents, and a court that has made federal intervention in state matters a matter of course. No matter what the Republicans say in public about states’ rights, it’s not about that at all.
It’s about who is in power.