Disclaimer: Content on the YP4 blog does not necessarily reflect the views of Young People For or People For the American Way Foundation. The views, ideas, statements or claims posted on this site by members of the public cannot in any way be attributed to either Young People For or People For the American Way Foundation.
UPDATE: Wisconsin Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen is now asking the state Supreme Court to reinstate Act 23 (aka AB 7) in time for it to apply in November. Along with the state Department of Justice, he will file a Petition to Bypass Court of Appeals and a Motion for Consolidation in both cases. League of Women Voters lawyer Lester Pines called the move a kind of a hail Mary pass by the Attorney General, and seemed confident that the Supreme Court would reject the requests. He pointed out that this is the same court that refused to immediately take up the cases earlier this year. Still, the voting rights supporters who originally brought cases are concerned and will fight the Attorney General’s requests. Meanwhile, two federal challenges to the law are currently pending, with hearings scheduled in October.
Although HB 934, Pennsylvania’s ALEC-tied voter ID law, has been tested since its passage earlier this year, it remains alive and well (for now, that is) after Commonwealth Court Judge Robert Simpson refused to grant a temporary injunction. He was stunningly unconvinced that “disenfranchisement was immediate or inevitable” – even with state officials admitting that it would affect more Pennsylvanians than previously estimated. And, he wasn’t at all bothered by the fact that the purported rationale for the law was a pretext for taking away the right to vote: Pennsylvania conceded that there “have been no investigations or prosecutions of in-person voter fraud in Pennsylvania,” and House Majority Leader Mike Turzai, a one-time ALEC member, even championed its overtly political implications.
Voting rights supporters are by no means backing down.
UPDATE: Judge David Flanagan made permanent his earlier injunction in the case brought by the Milwaukee NAACP and Voces de la Frontera, joining a permanent injunction issued by Judge Richard Niess in the League of Women Voters case. Now both courts would have to lift their blocking orders in order for Act 23 (aka AB 7) to be reinstated. With appeals pending, and no further rulings expected until after November, it is virtually guaranteed that the ID requirement will not apply in the general election.
Wisconsin appellate decisions typically take nine to 12 months, according to Lester Pines, an attorney with the League of Women Voters. The Department of Justice has asked the appeals panel to expedite the League's case, but Pines said even if it agrees to do so, he does not believe it would issue a ruling before the recall elections.
The Supreme Court has been deeply divided in pivotal cases in recent years, with conservatives claiming a 4-3 majority. Pines said Monday's rulings shows the justices do not always make decisions along ideological lines.
Two separate injunctions are currently blocking enforcement of Act 23 (aka AB 7), the voter ID law originally sponsored by Representative Jeffrey Stone and several others with ties to ALEC. A trial is underway before Dane County Circuit Court Judge David Flanagan.
UPDATE: Yesterday, Judge Niess issued a new ruling in the League of Women Voters case, a permanent injunction against Act 23 (aka AB 7). WBAY reporting. This follows his ruling last week on standing in the case, and Judge Flanagan’s ruling in another brought by the Milwaukee NAACP and Voces de la Frontera. FairVote’s Wisconsin legal memo is available here.