[EL] Lead Penn Voter ID Plaintiff gets her ID

[JBoppjr at aol.com]

Can get to the federal courthouse but cannot get to the DMV.  How  funny!  
Jim Bopp
 
 
In a message dated 8/17/2012 5:14:21 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
wgroth at fdgtlaborlaw.com writes:

The  issue didn't come up in Crawford since the plaintiffs were  all
organizational, and there was no evidentiary hearings--the case was  decided
on cross motions for summary judgment.  However, I often  accompany clients
or witnesses to the Indianapolis federal courthouse who  did not have or
forgot to bring photo ID.  In every one of those  instances, courthouse
security has allowed me to verify the identity of the  persons accompanying
me and with only minimal delay has given them  unrestricted access.  

William R. Groth
Fillenwarth Dennerline  Groth & Towe, LLP
429 E. Vermont Street, Ste. 200
Indianapolis, IN  46202
Telephone: (317) 353-9363
Fax: (317) 351-7232
E-mail:   wgroth at fdgtlaborlaw.com 

-----Original Message-----
From:  law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu
[mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu]  On Behalf Of Michael
McDonald
Sent: Friday, August 17, 2012 4:20  PM
To: law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
Subject: Re: [EL] Lead Penn  Voter ID Plaintiff gets her ID

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

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


_______________________________________________
Law-election  mailing  list
Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20120818/becbd400/attachment.html>