voter ID law

is gratuitous from a practical point of view as in-person fraud is vanishingly rare (with less than 31 cases out of 1 billion ballots since 2000).

In-person fraud is vanishingly rare. A recent study found that, since 2000, there were only 31 credible allegations of voter impersonation the only type of fraud that photo IDs could prevent during a period of time in which over 1 billion ballots were cast.9 Identified instances of 'fraud' are honest mistakes. So-called cases of in-person impersonation voter 'fraud' are almost always the product of an elections worker or a voter making an honest mistake, and that even these mistakes are extremely infrequent.10

is discriminatory because certain forms of id that minority voters or aged voters in nursing homes generally function with (veterans affairs id cards or now-expired driver's licenses) are not recognized.

States exclude forms of ID in a discriminatory manner. Texas allows concealed weapons permits for voting, but does not accept student ID cards. Until its voter ID law was struck down, North Carolina prohibited public assistance IDs and state employee ID cards, which are disproportionately held by Black voters. And until recently, Wisconsin permitted active duty military ID cards, but prohibited Veterans Affairs ID cards for voting.

is discriminatory in that those pushing the laws do so knowing that up to 25% of african-American citizens of voting age lack government-issued photo id, compared to only 8% of whites.

Minority voters disproportionately lack ID. Nationally, up to 25% of African-American citizens of voting age lack government-issued photo ID, compared to only 8% of whites.6

is discriminatory in their enforcement: Minority voters are more frequently questioned about id than are white voters.

Voter ID laws are enforced in a discriminatory manner. A Caltech/MIT study found that minority voters are more frequently questioned about ID than are white voters.7

is needed on principle alone so that no individual has their vote canceled out by a vote cast illegally.

Scott Walker does here, that the scale of fraudulent voting is irrelevant: It doesn't matter if there's one, 100, or 1,000. Amongst us, who would be that one person who would like to have our vote canceled out by a vote that was cast illegally'

Ruth Bader Ginsburg's assessment that Texas' voter ID law cleared last weekend by the Supreme Court is 'purposefully discriminatory.

is unjustified in that, by failing to show any evidence of in-person voter fraud or showing how the id requirement helps modernize elections, the law's supporters fail to demonstrate a state interest that justifies the burden being placed on citizens.

Souter noted that the state, by failing to show any evidence of in-person voter fraud or how the ID requirement helps modernize elections, failed to demonstrate a state interest that justified the burden being placed on citizens.

is unlawful because the expense in obtaining even the 'free' ids are cost prohibitive for many Americans, makes them tantamount to an illegal poll tax. (these costs include transportation costs, costs associated with retrieving or re-applying for birth certificates or social security cards, etc).

A poll tax is 'a tax of a fixed amount per person levied on adults and often linked to the right to vote.'11 In Harper, the Court stated that the ability to vote should not be conditioned upon one's ability to pay a fee.12 There, the Court drew a line prohibiting mechanisms that make one's ability to vote contingent upon financial wherewithal.13

voter ID law, n.Definitions

voter ID law