Wednesday, April 13, 2016
That was fast. It took about 4 days, not the usual 4 months. The 7th circuit has ruled that the Frank v Walker plaintiffs can pursue their as-applied challenges. It's midnight here in Nebraska, where I'm working on a disclaimer case, where I was able to find local counsel. But I'm going to read Judge Easterbrook's decision next. My sense is that it's good, but a little less than I'd hoped for. I have two clients in Indiana who want to bring as-applied challenges, but need a better lawyer than I am for the case. Each was denied the vote in the 2015 general election when they tested the voter ID policy by not showing ID.
More after I've read it.
http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2016/D04-12/C:15-3582:J:Easterbrook:aut:T:fnOp:N:1736108:S:0
(i didnt like this blog entry, so the next day i wrote a different version of it.)
I had to look up the word "gastonette". It's obscure, but if Safire vouches for it it's ok by me. It's from the "after you, my dear alphonse" vaudeville routine. I'm old enough to know that one. I've been there too. I spent 2004 being told I couldn't renew my driver's license because I didn't have a birth certificate, and I couldn't get a birth certificate because my driver's license wasn't valid. It's what got me motivated to fight voter ID. I don't trust the BVM to do anything well, so I don't want them in charge of who gets to vote.
"Indeed, one may understand plaintiffs as seeking for Wisconsin the sort of safety net that Indiana has had from the outset. A person seeking to vote in Indiana who contends that despite effort he has been unable to obtain a complying photo ID for financial or religious reasons may file an affidavit to that effect and have his vote provisionally counted."
This is slightly wrong about how it works in Indiana. A person must claim indigency, under penalty of perjury, to use that affidavit. A personal who is merely poor might not qualify, and the gasconette can affect the non-indigent. I was able to afford a lawyer to sort out my ID troubles the first time,and the second time all I had to do was drive 1000 miles and take my (elderly, blind) mother with me to the vital statistic office of my home state where she vouched for me, showed her ID, I paid $10, and they gave me a copy of my birth certificate, which by now I have lost again. I was not indigent until I paid the lawyer, and I am no longer indigent.
Similarly, the religious objection must be to the taking of the photo, and not just the ID itself. Some people think an ID is the mark of the beast, or the handiwork of the devil, but they don't get the religious exemption. It's pretty much only the Amish, who generally don't believe in voting anyway, who would qualify.
"Wisconsin’s rules for casting provisional ballots, unlike those of Indiana, require a voter who does not present an acceptable photo ID at the polling place to present such an ID by the end of the week"
In Indiana it's ten days rather than the end of the week, but not much difference there. I don't think we have any stats on how many people go the affidavit route, but I believe it's very rare.
One way in which Indiana's process differs from Wisconsin's is that Indiana charges for documents, such as a birth certificate. Wisconsin said that would be an unconstitutional poll tax; Indiana doesn't care. Of course most Indiana voters also drive, so they pay $20 for their ID every few years, which works both as a voting license and driving license. The court doesn't seem to have a problem with that; I think it's a clear 24th Amendment problem.
Meanwhile, the vote in the Missouri senate to put voter ID on the ballot to amend the state constitution got stalled by a Dem. fillibuster.
More after I've read it.
http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2016/D04-12/C:15-3582:J:Easterbrook:aut:T:fnOp:N:1736108:S:0
(i didnt like this blog entry, so the next day i wrote a different version of it.)
I had to look up the word "gastonette". It's obscure, but if Safire vouches for it it's ok by me. It's from the "after you, my dear alphonse" vaudeville routine. I'm old enough to know that one. I've been there too. I spent 2004 being told I couldn't renew my driver's license because I didn't have a birth certificate, and I couldn't get a birth certificate because my driver's license wasn't valid. It's what got me motivated to fight voter ID. I don't trust the BVM to do anything well, so I don't want them in charge of who gets to vote.
"Indeed, one may understand plaintiffs as seeking for Wisconsin the sort of safety net that Indiana has had from the outset. A person seeking to vote in Indiana who contends that despite effort he has been unable to obtain a complying photo ID for financial or religious reasons may file an affidavit to that effect and have his vote provisionally counted."
This is slightly wrong about how it works in Indiana. A person must claim indigency, under penalty of perjury, to use that affidavit. A personal who is merely poor might not qualify, and the gasconette can affect the non-indigent. I was able to afford a lawyer to sort out my ID troubles the first time,and the second time all I had to do was drive 1000 miles and take my (elderly, blind) mother with me to the vital statistic office of my home state where she vouched for me, showed her ID, I paid $10, and they gave me a copy of my birth certificate, which by now I have lost again. I was not indigent until I paid the lawyer, and I am no longer indigent.
Similarly, the religious objection must be to the taking of the photo, and not just the ID itself. Some people think an ID is the mark of the beast, or the handiwork of the devil, but they don't get the religious exemption. It's pretty much only the Amish, who generally don't believe in voting anyway, who would qualify.
"Wisconsin’s rules for casting provisional ballots, unlike those of Indiana, require a voter who does not present an acceptable photo ID at the polling place to present such an ID by the end of the week"
In Indiana it's ten days rather than the end of the week, but not much difference there. I don't think we have any stats on how many people go the affidavit route, but I believe it's very rare.
One way in which Indiana's process differs from Wisconsin's is that Indiana charges for documents, such as a birth certificate. Wisconsin said that would be an unconstitutional poll tax; Indiana doesn't care. Of course most Indiana voters also drive, so they pay $20 for their ID every few years, which works both as a voting license and driving license. The court doesn't seem to have a problem with that; I think it's a clear 24th Amendment problem.
Meanwhile, the vote in the Missouri senate to put voter ID on the ballot to amend the state constitution got stalled by a Dem. fillibuster.
Comments:
Post a Comment
