Summary
Professor Nathaniel Persily comments on the implications of a recent ruling regarding voter identification on upcoming elections for The New York Times.
With the midterm elections only months away, efforts to carry out some of the country’s strictest photo ID requirements and shorten early voting in several politically pivotal states have been thrown into limbo by a series of court decisions concluding that the measures infringe on the right to vote.
The most recent ruling came last Wednesday, when a federal judge ordered Ohio’s elections chief to restore early voting hours on the three days before Election Day. It is the second lower court decision in Ohio since 2012 that bolsters voter rights.
—
“The Wisconsin case is the most important of the voter ID cases that we’ve had,” said Nathaniel Persily, a Stanford University law professor and political scientist. “It’s a sophisticated analysis, it is extensive and it opens up a new area of inquiry on the Voting Rights Act.”
A state court judge in Arkansas also rejected as unconstitutional the photo ID requirements in May. But, in part because a primary was approaching, the judge allowed the state to move ahead with the requirement for now.
The decisions in Wisconsin and Arkansas are being appealed.
Read More