[EL] PA voter ID law decision

[Doug Hess]

I see. But nothing about informing people of how this works? I still
imagine lots of people who live under rocks (or watch "Matlock"
re-runs all day) will be caught by surprise. Is there a "day off"
alternative that doesn't include the penalty of "come back later"?

Doug



On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 4:25 PM, John Tanner <john.k.tanner at gmail.com> wrote:
> I think I read that they have adopted a "close enough" rule or practice to
> give IDs to people who don't have specific documents mentioned in the
> statute -- sort of like SC's "we'll take your word for it" policy.
>
> Nothing like litigation to effect change
>
> On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 3:45 PM, Doug Hess <douglasrhess at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> So, the court will likely use what measure or method to determine if
>> the voter ID law can be implemented without disenfranchisement?
>>
>> Seems the Supreme Court of PA has already noted that "...both  state
>> agencies involved appreciate that some registered voters have been and
>> will be unable to comply with the requirements maintained by PennDOT
>> to obtain an identification card under  Section  1510(b).  See N.T.
>> at  713  (testimony  from  a  deputy  secretary  for PennDOT that “at
>> the end of the day there will be people who will not be able to
>> qualify for a driver’s license or a PennDOT ID  card”), 749, 772, 810,
>> 995."
>>
>> So what's left to decide (for the near term)? Or is there really
>> nothing to decide and the language of what is "instructed" is just
>> worded that way? Are these "alternate IDs" being given out readily? Do
>> people know about them?
>>
>> The text: http://www.pacourts.us/OpPosting/Supreme/out/J-114-2012pco.pdf
>>
>> Doug
>> _______________________________________________
>> Law-election mailing list
>> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
>> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
>
>