PA Photo ID Law: The State Admits There Is No Evidence Of In-Person Voter Impersonation Fraud

[freeandequalpa]

Last edited Tue Jul 24, 2012, 06:08 AM - Edit history (1)

In the lawsuit challenging the PA photo ID law, the Commonwealth has admitted in writing that there is no evidence of in-person voter impersonation fraud, which is the only kind of fraud a law requiring voters to show ID at the polls possibly could prevent: http://pilcop.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Exhibit-3-Applewhite-Stipulation-copy.pdf

If you are interested in following developments in the lawsuit, I am reporting on it on my blog: http://freeandequalpa.wordpress.com/

[Scuba]

1. Could be a good precedent for Wisconsin and other States. Thanks for the post and your activism.

[Curmudgeoness]

2. Welcome to DU and the PA group.

Thanks for the information, and link to your blog. We will keep our eyes on what is happening.

[enough]

3. Thank you for your extremely useful, detailed and informative blog. It has all the information

I've been looking for about this case, in a well-organized and accessible format. A great example of the internet at it's best.

And welcome to DU, from another Pennsylvanian!

[Gothmog]

4. I like your blog

I have been advising my local party on the Texas voter id law and the related litigation for some time. I like your blog and the filings.

I am hopeful that the plaintiffs are successful in striking down the PA voter suppression law. The change in the rules on IDs shows that the state is worried

[freeandequalpa]

9. Thanks.

The hearing on the petitioners' request for a preliminary injunction starts on Wednesday in front of a single Judge on PA's Commonwealth Court, which technically is an appellate court, but which has original jurisdiction over suits against the Commonwealth. The hearing is expected to last 5-7 days, so it is possible that we would have a decision by the middle of August. The case then, I think, would be appealed to a 3 judge panel on the Commonwealth Court. The subsequent appeal to the PA Supreme Court could be interesting. The Court was comprised of 4 Republicans and 3 Democrats until a few months ago. Then, one of the Justices was hit with criminal charges and suspended. So there currently is a 3-3 split on the high court. If they vote party-line, the decision of the Commonwealth Court 3 judge panel, whatever it is, may end up as the law of the case by default.

[freeandequalpa]

16. My mistake

After researching the issue, I have concluded that I was wrong about the appellate procedure. An order by a Commonwealth Court judge granting or denying a request for a preliminary injunction in an original jurisdiction case such as this one is appealable directly to the Supreme Court -- it will not be reviewed by a three-judge panel of the Commonwealth Court. (Pa. Rules of Appellate Procedure 311(a)(4) and 1101). Therefore, if the Supreme Court were to split 3-3, Judge Simpson's decision would end up being the final ruling in the case.

[enough]

5. The Stipulation is stunning. Not only do they admit there is no evidence of in-person voter fraud,

but also that there have been NO INVESTIGATIONS of in-person voter fraud, and that they will NOT OFFER ANY EVIDENCE that in-person voter fraud has happened in PA or elsewhere, or that it is likely to happen.

Thanks again for the link in the OP.

[Gothmog]

6. In the Texas voter id trial, the state used some made up evidence to justify these laws

I agree that the stipulation is very telling. In the Section 5 trial for the Texas voter suppression law, AG Greg Abbott was making crap up about voter fraud and had some idiots claim that there had to be some voter fraud out there to justify this law. Hopefully, the panel of judges on this case did not buy this crap.

[freeandequalpa]

10. All eggs in the Crawford basket

In the Crawford case, the case where the US Supreme Court upheld Indiana's photo ID law, the Court held that it was not necessary for Indiana to show evidence of actual voter impersonation fraud to establish that the law served a legitimate purpose. So I think the Commonwealth is putting all of its eggs in that basket. If the PA court decides (as it should) that Crawford is irrelevant because the petitioners here only are alleging violations of the PA Constitution (whereas the plaintiffs in Crawford alleged violations of the federal Constitution), then I think the law is doomed.

[Gothmog]

7. The DOJ is looking at the PA law

This is intersting http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/07/doj_investigates_pennsylvania_voter_id_law.php Hopefully, this investgation is not necessary and the state court judge will strike down the PA law. The change in the voter id requirements tell me that the state is worried about this lawsuit

[freeandequalpa]

11. Wow.

One of the expert reports submitted by the voters challenging the PA law indicates that there may well be evidence to support the notion that the law violates Section 2 of the VRA: http://www.aclupa.org/downloads/BarretoReport.pdf

[kooljerk666]

12. This did make front page of Phill Inquirer...............

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/politics/state/20120724_U_S__investigation_of_Pa__s_new_voter_ID_law.html

I hope Sheldon Whitehouse does the questioning, when he grills people they sizzle like a cheezebugah!

[femmocrat]

8. K&R and Welcome to DU.

Thank you for the information.

[enough]

13. Hey freeandequalpa, did you see Talking Points Memo credits your blog for their front-page story

about this?

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/07/pennsylvania_voter_id_no_in_person_voter_fraud.php?ref=fpa

[Gothmog]

14. Congratulations

Your blog is making a difference. Keep up the good work.

I will be following this case closely. If the DOJ does not prevail in the Texas case, we will be looking at suing on the basis of state law claims in Texas. The Texas constitution has some strange language that may make it harder to sue on these grounds in Texas. I still think that the poll tax issue is viable in Texas in that by statute, one can not get the "free" id in Texas without paying for a birth certificate

[freeandequalpa]

15. Thanks for pointing this out.

I had a huge uptick in traffic on the blog today, and this explains it. Hopefully some people will read the details of what is going on and move away from the talking points.

Oh, who am I kidding?