Wisconsin’s Voter-ID Law Just Experienced Another Setback

Another nail in the coffin.

Charles Lankford leaves a voting booth after casting a ballot in the Wisconsin recall election June 5, 2012 in Clinton, Wisconsin.
National Journal
Emma Roller
Add to Briefcase
Emma Roller
April 29, 2014, 1:55 p.m.

It’s been called “the most re­strict­ive voter-ID le­gis­la­tion in the na­tion.” Now, it’s just a lame duck.

On Tues­day, a fed­er­al judge struck down Wis­con­sin’s voter-iden­ti­fic­a­tion law, which had already been re­jec­ted by the state Su­preme Court. The law, passed in 2011, re­quired all voters to present a state-is­sued photo ID to be able to vote.

Such voter-ID laws have gained pop­ular­ity in con­ser­vat­ive states, and they pur­port to pre­vent voter fraud. But Demo­crat­ic op­pon­ents ar­gue that the laws un­fairly im­pede minor­ity voters, who are more likely to vote Demo­crat­ic.

It’s doubt­ful the cur­rent law could be re­in­stated in time for Gov. Scott Walk­er’s reelec­tion in Novem­ber. If pos­sible, it would take a Her­culean ef­fort on the part of the law’s sup­port­ers to go through the fed­er­al Ap­peals Court.

The de­cision found that Wis­con­sin’s law vi­ol­ated Sec­tion 2 of the Vot­ing Rights Act, which pro­hib­its prac­tices that res­ult in the dis­en­fran­chise­ment of minor­ity voters.

Just how much of a prob­lem is voter fraud in Wis­con­sin? In 2008, the state Gov­ern­ment Ac­count­ab­il­ity Board sur­veyed counties’ pro­sec­ut­ing at­tor­ney of­fices and found that “a total of six crim­in­al com­plaints had been filed al­leging voter fraud.” (Walk­er’s ad­min­is­tra­tion has but­ted heads with GAB mem­bers in the past.)

In his de­cision, U.S. Dis­trict Judge Lynne Ad­el­man re­jec­ted the state’s ar­gu­ment that the voter-ID law was a small im­ped­i­ment for voters and so would not vi­ol­ate the Vot­ing Rights Act.

“There is noth­ing in these cases in­dic­at­ing that a Sec­tion 2 plaintiff must show that the chal­lenged vot­ing prac­tice makes it im­possible for minor­it­ies to vote or that minor­it­ies are in­cap­able of com­ply­ing with the chal­lenged vot­ing pro­ced­ure,” Ad­el­man wrote. “Even if the bur­den of ob­tain­ing a qual­i­fy­ing ID proves to be min­im­al for the vast ma­jor­ity of Blacks and Lati­nos who will need to ob­tain one in or­der to vote, that bur­den will still de­ter a large num­ber of such Blacks and Lati­nos from vot­ing.”

Ad­el­man ar­gued that the voter-ID law dis­pro­por­tion­ately af­fected black and Latino voters, who are more likely to lack a qual­i­fy­ing ID or to lack the un­der­ly­ing doc­u­ments they would need to ob­tain a qual­i­fy­ing ID. “In Mil­wau­kee County, only 2.4% of white eli­gible voters lack both a qual­i­fy­ing ID and one or more of the un­der­ly­ing doc­u­ments needed to ob­tain an ID, while 4.5% of Black and 5.9% of Latino eli­gible voters lack both an ID and at least one un­der­ly­ing doc­u­ment,” he wrote.

Un­der the law, Wis­con­sin res­id­ents would have to present one of the nine fol­low­ing forms of ID at their polling place:

  1. A Wis­con­sin driver’s li­cense
  2. A Wis­con­sin state ID card
  3. An ID card is­sued by the U.S. mil­tary
  4. A U.S. pass­port
  5. A nat­ur­al­iz­a­tion cer­ti­fic­ate is­sued with­in the last two years
  6. A tem­por­ary Wis­con­sin driver’s li­cense
  7. A tem­por­ary state ID card
  8. An ID card from a fed­er­ally re­cog­nized In­di­an tribe
  9. An ID card from an ac­cred­ited Wis­con­sin uni­versity or col­lege, along with a doc­u­ment show­ing cur­rent en­roll­ment

Through his de­cision, Ad­el­man one-upped the state Su­preme Court, which was re­view­ing the case. So, even if the state court ruled in fa­vor of the law, it would re­main blocked be­cause of Ad­el­man’s rul­ing.

Need­less to say, the de­cision was in­sult to in­jury for Re­pub­lic­an lead­ers in the state.

“I am dis­ap­poin­ted with the or­der and con­tin­ue to be­lieve Wis­con­sin’s law is con­sti­tu­tion­al,” the state at­tor­ney gen­er­al, J.B. Van Hol­len, said in a two-sen­tence state­ment. “We will ap­peal.”

Rep. Robin Vos, the speak­er of the Wis­con­sin state As­sembly, said state Re­pub­lic­ans aren’t giv­ing up either, and are work­ing on an­oth­er voter-ID bill that would be im­mune to court chal­lenges.

“The U.S. Su­preme Court has said voter ID is con­sti­tu­tion­al. We look for­ward to work­ing with the gov­ernor and our col­leagues in the Sen­ate to do whatever it takes to en­sure voter ID is in place as quickly as pos­sible,” he said. “The in­teg­rity of our elec­tions is too im­port­ant to be caught up in the courts. Voter ID should be law in Wis­con­sin.”

Mean­while, Demo­crats re­joiced na­tion­ally.

“Today, the courts took an im­port­ant step to make sure the right to vote is pro­tec­ted for all eli­gible Wis­con­sin­ites,” the Demo­crat­ic Na­tion­al Com­mit­tee said in a state­ment. “This de­cision re­in­forces a com­mit­ment to true equal pro­tec­tion, and re­af­firms that ac­cess to the bal­lot box re­mains a fun­da­ment­al right pro­tec­ted against in­ter­fer­ence in Wis­con­sin and across the coun­try.”

What We're Following See More »
CITES CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Lieberman Withdraws from Consideration for FBI Job
3 days ago
THE LATEST
MINIMUM 2 PERCENT GDP
Trump Tells NATO Countries To Pay Up
3 days ago
BREAKING
MANAFORT AND FLYNN
Russians Discussed Influencing Trump Through Aides
3 days ago
THE DETAILS

"American spies collected information last summer revealing that senior Russian intelligence and political officials were discussing how to exert influence over Donald J. Trump through his advisers." The conversations centered around Paul Manafort, who was campaign chairman at the time, and Michael Flynn, former national security adviser and then a close campaign surrogate. Both men have been tied heavily with Russia and Flynn is currently at the center of the FBI investigation into possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.

Source:
BUT WHITE HOUSE MAY USE AGAINST HIM ANYWAY
Ethics Cops Clear Mueller to Work on Trump Case
5 days ago
THE LATEST

"Former FBI Director Robert Mueller has been cleared by U.S. Department of Justice ethics experts to oversee an investigation into possible collusion between then-candidate Donald Trump's 2016 election campaign and Russia." Some had speculated that the White House would use "an ethics rule limiting government attorneys from investigating people their former law firm represented" to trip up Mueller's appointment. Jared Kushner is a client of Mueller's firm, WilmerHale. "Although Mueller has now been cleared by the Justice Department, the White House may still use his former law firm's connection to Manafort and Kushner to undermine the findings of his investigation, according to two sources close to the White House."

Source:
BUSINESSES CAN’T PLEAD FIFTH
Senate Intel to Subpoena Two of Flynn’s Businesses
5 days ago
THE LATEST

Senate Intelligence Committee chairman Richard Burr (R-NC) and ranking member Mark Warner (D-VA) will subpoena two businesses owned by former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn. Burr said, "We would like to hear from General Flynn. We'd like to see his documents. We'd like him to tell his story because he publicly said he had a story to tell."

×
×

Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.

Login