[EL] Lead Penn Voter ID Plaintiff gets her ID

[Michael McDonald]

Since this is relevant to my earlier posting on this same thread: John Fund
claims id is necessary to enter a federal building. How did plaintiffs enter
a federal courthouse to testify in the Crawford litigation?

============
Dr. Michael P. McDonald
Associate Professor, George Mason University
Non-Resident Senior Fellow, Brookings Institution

                             Mailing address:
(o) 703-993-4191             George Mason University
(f) 703-993-1399             Dept. of Public and International Affairs
mmcdon at gmu.edu               4400 University Drive - 3F4
http://elections.gmu.edu     Fairfax, VA 22030-4444

From: law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu
[mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu] On Behalf Of John
Meyer
Sent: Friday, August 17, 2012 3:44 PM
To: law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
Subject: Re: [EL] Lead Penn Voter ID Plaintiff gets her ID

I think many of you may have read this, but it is relevant to the question
of need for voter ID requirements with specific reference to Pennsylvania
as it includes reference to an actual, recent look at various voting
irregularities in Philadelphia:

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/314273/voter-fraud-keystone-state-joh
n-fund

	I certainly am not an expert on Pennsylvania voter problems, but it
is well-known in political circles that both parties used to have areas
where they would
manufacture votes by various methods. with the demise of big-city Republican
machines, the tendency became more party-specific -- and even more so with
the collapse of some of the Republican suburban machines, such as Nassau
county in New York (I don't know if Nassau County R's actually manufactured
votes
or if they only followed the 1% of salary for all public employees
tradition).  Anyway, I do recommend the article.   

________________________________________
From: Jon Roland <jon.roland at constitution.org>
To: law-election at department-lists.uci.edu 
Sent: Friday, August 17, 2012 12:26 PM
Subject: Re: [EL] Lead Penn Voter ID Plaintiff gets her ID

In general there are no requirements for a plaintiff to prove identity to
file a case, in any jurisdiction. Identification comes in with being a
witness and providing evidence, such as presenting an affidavit, which must
be sworn before a notary or other designated verifier. Of course, the
attorney will be expected to provide his name, address, and bar card number,
but he will usually not have to otherwise prove he is who he says he is, and
his client can be a "John Doe". Even a witness may be anonymous with the
consent of the court. 

The elevation of personal identity to the importance accorded it today is an
innovation in our legal tradition. Historically it has had much less
importance, usually where ownership of property was involved.

On 08/17/2012 11:07 AM, Michael McDonald wrote: 
The state of Pennsylvania has a more strict
identification law for voting than to be a plaintiff in a case?

-- Jon

----------------------------------------------------------
Constitution Society               http://constitution.org
2900 W Anderson Ln C-200-322           twitter.com/lex_rex
Austin, TX 78757 512/299-5001  jon.roland at constitution.org
----------------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
Law-election mailing list
Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election