Thread: Update - Voter ID law is blocked

Published: 10.06.2006

Voter ID law is blocked
9th Circuit grants injunction, bars its use on Nov. 7
By Paul Davenport
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
PHOENIX — A federal appellate court on Thursday blocked enforcement of a 2004 state law requiring Arizona voters to present identification when casting ballots and to submit proof of citizenship when registering to vote.
Witthout comment, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals granted a motion by critics of the law for an injunction that bars enforcement of the law's voter-identification requirements during the Nov. 7 general election.
It also bars enforcement of a requirement that people produce specified proof of citizenship to register to vote. The deadline to register to vote in the general election is midnight Monday.
Secretary of State Jan Brewer, who has defended the law as a protection against voter fraud, said she's asked state Attorney General Terry Goddard to seek an immediate reversal.
"I'm very concerned about the confusion that this potentially will create in the upcoming election, with the retraining of all the poll workers and the re-education of the public so close to Nov. 7."
The 9th Circuit order was issued by two of the San Francisco-based court's judges. It said the injunction would remain in effect pending the court's resolution of the plaintiffs' appeals, a process that a lawyer for the challengers said would take months.
"This order would certainly run past the Nov. 7 general election," said the attorney, David Rosenbaum.
The law, which appeared on the 2004 ballot as Proposition 200, requires that voters at polling places produce government-issued picture ID or two pieces of other non-photo identification specified by the law.
Randy Pullen, the former chairman of Yes on Proposition 200 and currently the Republican Party's national committeeman for Arizona, blamed the decision on "activist" judges in the 9th Circuit.
"It shows you why it's so important to have President Bush appointing judges that aren't going to decide they know more about what the people want than the people do," Pullen said.
Ever since it passed in 2004, Arizona's voter ID law has been challenged in federal court by numerous groups including the Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, the League of Women Voters, the Navajo Nation, the Arizona Civil Liberties Union, the Arizona Advocacy Network and the Mexican-American Legal Defense and Educational Fund.
The challengers contend the voting provisions would disenfranchise numerous voters, particularly among minorities and the elderly, and that requiring voters to acquire and produce identification would be burdensome in time, money and effort. They also contend it hinders voter registration drives.
A U.S. District Court judge in Phoenix on Sept. 11 refused to prohibit election officials from enforcing the registration and polling-place identification requirements, and its provisions were enforced one day later during the state's Sept. 12 primary election.
Other parts of the 2004 law dealt with ineligibility of illegal immigrants to receive some government services and benefits.
Brewer said the people of Arizona voted overwhelmingly to require identification at the polls. She said the first statewide use of the requirement in the September primary "went off without a hitch" and the decision couldn't have come at a worse time.
"One million of them voted for it and will be very concerned and alarmed that all of a sudden it has been changed," Brewer said. "So we have a huge job in front of us . . . to work very diligently to see this is overturned as soon as possible and implemented as it was intended by the voters of Arizona.
In Missouri, the state Supreme Court judges raised many questions Wednesday as they considered the constitutionality of a new state law requiring people to show photo identification to vote.
A lower judge threw out the law last month, saying it infringes on the fundamental right to vote.
Judges homed in on the cost to obtain a birth certificate, one of the documents that can be used to get a state identification card or driver's license. In Missouri, a certified copy costs $15. A passport also can work to get a license or ID card, or to cast a ballot under the challenged law, but those cost more.
"They all cost money," said Judge Richard Teitelman.

http://www.azstarnet.com/sn/printDS/149843

"I'm very concerned about the confusion that this potentially will create in the upcoming election, with the retraining of all the poll workers and the re-education of the public so close to Nov. 7."
The 9th Circuit order was issued by two of the San Francisco-based court's judges. It said the injunction would remain in effect pending the court's resolution of the plaintiffs' appeals, a process that a lawyer for the challengers said would take months.

Balooney. It's not that hard to tell if someone has proper ID or not. If some knucklehead bouncer with an IQ of a tree stump at some crappy bar can do it then why can't government officials paid more money do it. Once again politics stumps the will of the people. I wonder who keeps greasing the hands of these corrupt judges?

It is againt the law to vote in a federal election if you are not a citizen. What are these judges thinking - or are they reconquista judges?

This makes me sick!!!

Newmexican wrote:

It is againt the law to vote in a federal election if you are not a citizen. What are these judges thinking - or are they reconquista judges?

They are TRAITORS

Added to Homepage

http://www.alipac.us/modules.php?name=N ... e&sid=1564

"One million of them voted for it and will be very concerned and alarmed that all of a sudden it has been changed," Brewer said. "So we have a huge job in front of us . . . to work very diligently to see this is overturned as soon as possible and implemented as it was intended by the voters of Arizona.

Which proves there's no such thing as the "will of the people" anymore.

They must think we are fools! You can't possibly tell me that minority people and the elderly (especially the elderly) haven't had to prove who they are at some point in life. It's such an obvious attempt by the left to perserve voter fraud. That's the only possible way some of these looney-tunes, we have in office, got there. This crap enrages me, because its so SO OBVIOUS what's going on and they pull it right before the election to prevent it from being implemented. They could have done this a long time ago. The people don't have a problem with it, the crooked politicians do!!

Couldn’t the election be contested? Maybe a class action law suit based on potential fraud, something to show the people are serious. The government hasn’t secured the border. Now we can’t even expect a fair election where only U.S. citizens vote. I’m loosing faith in the future of this nation and those in charge. It’s a good thing the founding fathers aren’t alive to see. I’m ashamed of what we’ve allowed and I’m sure they would be too.

So once again a court throws out the will of the people. Has happened plenty to us in CA. So our votes don't matter anymore? And apparently it doesn't matter anymore who all votes either. Imagine having to prove you are who you say you are. Seems there are many who want to destroy all this country stands for, just give it away to whoever whenever. I am truly worried about the future.

Published: 10.06.2006

No ID needed for Arizona voter registration pending appealBy Arthur H. Rotstein
ASSOCIATED PRESS
Arizona elections officials on Friday resumed registering voters without requiring proof of citizenship, even while the state attorney general planned to ask a federal appeals court to reconsider its injunction blocking the requirement.
The actions came a day after the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals blocked enforcement of a voter-approved requirement that people registering to vote show proof of citizenship. The court's injunction also prohibited elections officials from requiring identification at the polls, another part of the 2004 Arizona law that critics had appealed.
The actions return the state to its previous elections rules, at least for now.
"We will go back to our procedures that were basically the same as 2004," Coconino County Recorder Candace Owens said Friday. Elections officials in other counties said they planned similar actions.
Andrea Esquer, a spokeswoman for Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard, said her office planned to file an emergency motion Friday asking the same two-judge appellate panel to reconsider its ruling.
Several groups sued to block the law, contending its provisions would disenfranchise numerous voters, particularly minorities and the elderly, and that requiring voters to acquire and produce identification would be too burdensome. They also contend it hinders voter registration drives.
A federal judge in Phoenix refused to block the law's first statewide use in September, but the plaintiffs appealed that ruling.
Coconino County officials testified on behalf of the plaintiffs before the Sept. 12 primary election that delaying the implementation of the law "would not cause any hardship for us, and that we would go back to 2004 procedures," Owens said.
While the ruling stands, identification will not be needed, nor will conditional provisional ballots _ cast when someone has insufficient ID, Owens said.
Secretary of State Jan Brewer insists that Proposition 200 is a protection against voter fraud and hoped there would be a reversal "very quickly."
Randy Pullen, the former chairman of Yes on Proposition 200 and currently the Republican Party's national committeeman for Arizona, blamed the decision on "activist" judges in the 9th Circuit.
He said he's worried that non-citizens may take advantage of the injunction to register.
"We've had all this pressure, marching in the streets, today we march, tomorrow we vote _ and now all of a sudden they have no requirement that they prove citizenship to vote," Pullen said. "I'm very concerned."
Potential voters have until midnight Monday to register for the Nov. 7 general election.
Plaintiffs included the Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, the Hopi Tribe, the League of Women Voters, the Navajo Nation, the Arizona Advocacy Network and the Mexican-American Legal Defense and Educational Fund.
http://www.azstarnet.com/sn/printDS/149969