Friday, February 16, 2018
The Indiana statute is unconstitutional because it
conditions voting rights on payment of a “tax”—either
the fee of twenty-one dollars that the state ordinarily
charges for a driver’s license, or where citizens qualify
for a free identification card, the fees they must pay to
acquire underlying documentation necessary to get a
photo identification card. Ind. Code §§ 3-5-2-40.5, 9-24-
16-10(b).4
The practice of using poll taxes to prevent
access to the franchise was banned in federal elections
in 1964 by the Twenty-Fourth Amendment to the
United States Constitution, passed by Congress in
1962 and ratified by the states in 1964.5
The TwentyFourth
Amendment states, “The right of citizens of the
United States to vote in any primary or other election
for President or Vice President…shall not be denied or
abridged by the United States or any state by reason
of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.”6
In Harman v. Forssenius, 380 U.S. 528 (1965), this
Court concluded that no state may constitutionally
present a federal voter with the requirement that
6
either he pay a poll tax, or file a certificate of
residence. This requirement was an abridgement of
the right to vote and thus unconstitutional under the
Twenty-Fourth Amendment. Id. at 538. This Court
recognized the long Congressional history opposing the
constitutionality of the poll tax. Id. at 538-39. In other
words, creating a procedural workaround voters must
go through to avoid a poll tax does not redeem the poll
tax’s fundamental unconstitutionality. This Court
further recognized the long and rich history in this
country that “a state may not impose a penalty upon
those who exercise a right guaranteed by the
Constitution.” Id. at 540.
This is congressman keith ellison's amicus in Crawford. Great stuff, I'm not sure how I missed it at the time.
This is congressman keith ellison's amicus in Crawford. Great stuff, I'm not sure how I missed it at the time.
Comments:
Post a Comment
