Wisconsin
Related: About this forumBad news and slightly good news on voter ID in Wisconsin
The U.S. Supreme Court announced today that it will not hear the appeal from the voter ID case. This ends the stay it issued last October to allow the fall election to go on without requiring voter ID. That is very bad news for the most vulnerable voters in Wisconsin and around the United States as well because other Republican-governed states now have the go-ahead signal from the Court.
The slightly good news is that Attorney General Brad Schimel has ordered that ID will not be required for April 7 (remember that a stopped clock is right twice a day).
This is the full statement from the GAB on today's developments (emphasis added):
The U.S. Supreme Court today cleared the way for enforcement of Wisconsins 2011 voter ID law, but because the Spring Election is two weeks away, the Attorney General has advised state election officials not to implement it at the April 7 election.
Absentee ballots are already in the hands of voters, therefore, the law cannot be implemented for the April 7 election, Attorney General Brad Schimel stated today. The Voter ID law will be in place for future elections this decision is final. The Wisconsin Department of Justice represented the Government Accountability Board in defending the voter ID law.
Kevin Kennedy, Wisconsins chief election official, said the G.A.B. anticipates there will be special elections in 2015 at which photo ID will be required. The next statewide election at which photo ID will be required is the Spring Primary on February 16, 2016.
On March 23, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal of an earlier Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals decision which had reinstated the photo ID law. The law had been enjoined by the courts since March, 2012.
Even though voters will not have to show an ID to receive a ballot at this election, voters who are registering now in the municipal clerks office or at the polling place on Election Day should be aware that they may use their driver license or state ID card to establish their residence if it contains a current address.
You may use a valid driver license or state ID card for proof of residence when you register to vote, either before or on Election Day said Kennedy. But you are not required to show a photo ID to get your ballot.
Photo ID requirements are different than proof of residence requirements. All voters must show proof of residence to register to vote, and a driver license or state ID card with a current address are just two of many documents can use to prove they are residents. A full list is available here: http://gab.wi.gov/publications/voter-guides/proof-of-residence.
Also, voters who have a Wisconsin driver license or state ID card are required to provide the card number on the voter registration form. Voters who do not have a driver license or state ID card can use the last four digits of their Social Security number instead.
The G.A.B. advises anyone who does not have a state ID card to take advantage of the opportunity to get one for free. The Wisconsin Division of Motor Vehicles has a process to allow people to obtain a free State ID card for voting purposes, even if the person does not have a birth certificate.
Kennedy said that process can take time, especially for people born outside of Wisconsin, so it makes sense to get started early. More information is available at the Wisconsin DMV website:
http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/drivers/drivers/apply/petition-process.htm.
Voters are also encouraged to visit the Wisconsin Government Accountabilitys voter services website, MyVote.wi.gov, for information about voting.
So, after April 7, let's get busy and help people get their free IDs.
midnight
(26,624 posts)any form of identification. But after this April election, regardless of registration you do need to show proof of who you are?
Do I understand this correctly? Thanks... I heard this on the radio driving home this afternoon.
dragonlady
(3,577 posts)After April 7, every voter will have to show one of the following acceptable photo IDs to receive a ballot. This includes absentee voters, who must send a copy of the ID with the first absentee request and again if they change their address or name (even military or overseas). The only exception is for absentee voters "indefinitely confined because of age, physical illness or infirmity" or in a nursing home where special voting deputies visit.
The acceptable photo IDs:
>A WI DOT driver's license or state ID (address need not be current)
>Military ID (uniformed service only, not VA)
>U.S. passport
(The above can be expired if expiration date is after the last fall election, November 4, 2014)
>Certificate of naturalization if within the prior two years
>Unexpired receipt from DOT for driver's license or state ID (what you get until the permanent card is mailed)
>Unexpired WI-accredited college ID containing signature of student, date of issue and expiration not more than two years after issue, plus proof of enrollment (tuition receipt, class schedule, etc., and can be shown on phone or computer if voting in person)
>ID card issued by federally recognized Indian tribe in Wisconsin
Of course, this will cause major confusion, but that's part of the reason for it. At least voters have some time to arrange for a free ID from the DMV if they can qualify.
Gothmog
(145,443 posts)I know one of the attorneys representing the good guys in the Texas voter id case which is scheduled for oral arguments on April 28. The attorneys representing Texas plaintiffs did not want the ACLU to seek cert. in the Wisconsin case. The Texas case is a stronger case. The DOJ is a party in the Texas case and there are express findings of fact as to intentional discrimination in the Texas case.
Here are Prof. Hasen's observations http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71186
Had the Court agreed to hear the Wisconsin case, it is possible it would have read Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act even more narrowly in cases of vote denial, as well as make bad law on the scope of the equal protection clause. In this way, the Courts refusal to hear Wisconsins voter id case may be a blessing in disguise. As Ive long argued, the best way for liberals to cut their losses is to stay out of the Supreme Court when possible. Things could have been worse if the Court took Wisconsin than if they didnt. And if you trust Justice Ginsburg, trust her her in not voting to grant cert in this case.
I think that the Texas case is the stronger case and would be a better case to reach SCOTUS