Press Release-Crawford v. Marion County Board of Elections

–Zack Glick– 

Tonight SUNN has received a press statement from the Brett Pugach representing the petitioner.  This release is making the claim for the Supreme Court to hear the case.  This is the week that the Supreme Court will decide on the cases that they will hear for this term.

The full text of the release can be found after the break 

Press Release-Crawford v. Marion County Board of Elections

Brett Pugach-Counsel of Record for Petitioner

Indiana’s photo ID requirements are the most stringent of any state in our country.  They are the most restrictive and represent the greatest barriers to voting for certain groups of citizens that this country has seen since the poll tax was struck down by the Supreme Court in Harper v. Virginia (1966).  In particular, Indiana’s statute places an undue burden on many minority groups including African Americans and the elderly, and makes voting extremely difficult, time-consuming, and unaffordable for poor voters and voters who lack access to transportation. 

Unlike similar legislation from other states requiring photo ID to be presented before voting, Indiana’s state law makes no accommodation for voters who are unable to procure photo ID.  For example, Michigan’s statute allows voters in such a scenario to still vote so long as they sign a sworn affidavit statement, which they can do at the voting center on the day they vote.  However, Indiana’s statute makes no such provision.  Poor citizens do not have the money to obtain a government-issued photo ID, nor do they have the time to take days trying to get one, nor do many of them have a mode of transportation to arrive at such a government institution, nor do they possess the resources it takes to go through administrative and bureaucratic measures to find birth certificates, etc. which may only be found in other states. 

The likely result of such barriers will be that these populations will be discouraged or otherwise unable to exercise the most fundamental right of a citizen in a democratic society, the right to vote.  So, not only does this law exacerbate already low voter turnout numbers, but its consequences target and substantially affect specific groups of voters whose opinions expressed through the ballot box are of no less importance than any other citizen’s of the state of Indiana, and of the United States. 

The Supreme Court needs to step in and rule on this matter, especially considering the fact that lower court rulings have been inconsistent with each other.  With the 2008 Presidential Election rapidly approaching, integrity in our election system and legitimacy in its outcome need to be restored.  This country needs to regain the confidence of the people after the controversies of the 2000 and 2004 elections.  For such a ruling to gain widespread acceptance and authority, the Supreme Court must issue it before the election, rather than after it is too late, as was the case in Bush v. Gore.  Only once a determination is made which bestows guidance to the states as to what measures of state-regulation of elections are and are not constitutional, can we begin to establish and protect the rights of citizens, restore faith in our democracy, and hope for a less controversial outcome. 
The full text can be downloaded here.