Happy family

Find a legal form in minutes

Browse US Legal Forms’ largest database of 85k state and industry-specific legal forms.

Effects of Indiana Voter Photo Identification Law

Indiana had impressive turnout at its Democratic primary this week despite the April 28th US Supreme Court ruling that upheld the state’s voter photo identification requirement. (See US Legal Reporter April 28th entry at  http://reporter.uslegal.com/). As the new law was applied on Tuesday, persons without state or federal identification that included a photograph were not allowed to vote.

Interestingly, among those turned away were a group of Roman Catholic nuns of St. Mary’s Convent in South Bend, Indiana. Their expired passports were not accepted by a fellow nun who served as a polling inspector. These 12 nuns, all elderly and most of whom had been faithful voters during their lifetime, do not drive, and therefore, do not have driver’s licenses. The convent claims that the nuns knew of the photo requirement, and it will ensure that each nun that wishes to vote in the general election in November obtains proper identification. Indiana’s Secretary of State, Todd Rokita was not particularly compassionate towards those who were turned away, including the nuns, when he issued a statement emphasizing that the law is applicable to everyone and that voters over the age of 65 could vote by absentee ballot.

One purpose of the law is to prevent voter fraud, but opponents had argued that it negatively affected certain groups, such as minorities and, as is the case with the nuns, the elderly– two groups that are not as likely to possess such identification. (By the way, Indiana does not have a substantial record of voter fraud as it purportedly has never prosecuted a person for impersonating another voter). The law does allow for a voter without identification to cast a provisional vote and obtain the needed identification within ten days, but whether poll workers conveyed that message to all persons without identification is unclear. While the nuns were told of this option, at least one person, a student at Notre Dame, who presented her school ID and her out-of-state driver’s license, alleges she was not told about the provisional vote. Additionally, the nuns either refused the provisional ballots or were never given them due to the impossibility and impracticality of actually transporting these elderly persons, many of whom are wheelchair or walker-bound, to a motor vehicle branch and back within the allotted ten day period. (FYI: the voting Tuesday took place at the convent itself).

Jonah Goldman, who directs the Lawyers Committee’s Campaign for Fair Elections stated that the nuns and another person who was prevented from voting under the new law are “the face of the Supreme Court case” and many persons across the nation in states with voter identification laws were “being disenfranchised by a perceived, incorrect or illegal restrictive identification requirement” partly due to poll workers demanding more identification than the law requires.

As conveyed by John Borkowski, a lawyer who volunteered for the Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, who stated “[h]ere you have a bunch of nuns whose votes can’t be accepted by a bunch of nuns … who live with them in the polling place in their convent because they don’t have an ID,” isn’t this ironic? 

Source: http://www.sacbee.com/111/story/918857.html; http://news.findlaw.com/ap/a/p/1130//05-08-2008/20080508035002_4.html; http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24490932/

DS