Comment
Rate
More evidence in Voter ID case
|
||
| Advertisement |
By Bob Watson
bwatson@newstribune.com
Judge Richard Callahan has a lot of reading to do this weekend as he begins reviewing evidence and affidavits introduced in the ongoing Voter Identification lawsuit.
Final arguments in the case are scheduled Wednesday morning in the Cole County circuit court.
“We'll have an opportunity to summarize for the judge what our evidence has been, and indicate to him the reasons that he should rule in our favor, in finding this law unconstitutional,” said St. Louis attorney Burton Newman after a two-and-a-half-hour court session Friday afternoon.
Newman, an ACLU lawyer, filed a lawsuit in July challenging the law passed this year that, among its provisions, requires voters to show a government-issued photo ID card before getting a ballot on election day.
Friday's hearing was the first official chance for attorney Thor Hearne to present his evidence, after Callahan allowed the St. Louis lawyer to intervene in the case on behalf of state Sen. Delbert Scott, R-Lowry City, who helped write the controversial law.
“What we're trying to do is get into the (legal) record facts, studies, science (and) hard data that shows that this is something that's popular with all Missouri voters,” Hearne said, “for good reason, because it increases confidence and participation in our election process.”
Hearne's offerings include an affidavit from Scott, “who goes through the legislative history (of the law and) notes this is a comprehensive election reform,” Hearne told Callahan.
Hearne also represents Dale Morris, described as a poor, elderly, disabled St. Louis County voter who supports the law.
Secretary of State Robin Carnahan and Revenue Director Trish Vincent have been debating the number of registered Missouri voters who don't, now, have a proper ID, saying it's somewhere between 170,000 and 241,000 people.
Hearne's evidence also includes statements from two University of Missouri-Columbia political science professors who “say that this Missouri Voter Protection Act and the photo ID provisions are not going to affect, first off, that many Missourians,” he told reporters after Friday's hearing.
“They're not going to prevent any Missourians from casting a ballot and, in fact, they're going to increase confidence in the election process.”
Hearne also wants Callahan to consider statements from:
* A California economics professor.
* Indiana's secretary of state who works with a similar ID law that was upheld by the courts.
* Two St. Louis area elections officials who would contradict testimony given by other St. Louis election officials during an Aug. 21 hearing.
* A woman who served on the Carter-Baker Commission that has recommended better identification requirements for U.S. voters.
Newman represents the city governments of St. Louis and Kansas City and the governments of Jackson and St. Louis counties. His suit argues the new law violates 1980's “Hancock Amendment” to the state Constitution, imposing costs on local governments without paying them for the additional duties.
St. Louis attorney Don Downing - a former assistant attorney general - filed a second suit on behalf of a number of individuals, arguing the new law's requirements will keep the registered voters from being able to vote.
“I think the parties were able to explain to the judge what the evidence was,” Downing said. “It's a lot of information for him to digest.”
Downing asked Callahan to reject most of Hearne's evidence, arguing it was more public policy debate than focused on the legal points raised by the two lawsuits challenging the law.
Downing's suit says the Voter ID requirement violates Missouri's constitutional language that all properly registered Missourians “are entitled to vote at all elections by the people” if they go to the right polling place.
But, Hearne told reporters: “We have a whole host of requirements to make sure everybody votes once and that that vote is counted. ...
“In St. Louis, we had Ritzy the Dog who was registered to vote, so you can get on the voter role without being a person.”
Newman said, “Speed is important here because, regardless of the prevailing party in this court, there will be appeals to the Missouri Supreme Court, and there's a short time-span to allow for those appeals.”
Newman and Downing want Callahan to block the law, which went into effect Monday.
“It is in effect and will remain in effect until such time as Judge Callahan issues an injunction preventing further enforcement of the law,” Newman said.
All attorneys expect the case to be appealed.
“I think all parties recognize that it's very important that the Missouri Supreme Court speak on this issue in sufficient time before the general election,” Downing said, “so that all the local election authorities know what rules they're operating under.”
Final arguments in the case are scheduled Wednesday morning in the Cole County circuit court.
“We'll have an opportunity to summarize for the judge what our evidence has been, and indicate to him the reasons that he should rule in our favor, in finding this law unconstitutional,” said St. Louis attorney Burton Newman after a two-and-a-half-hour court session Friday afternoon.
Newman, an ACLU lawyer, filed a lawsuit in July challenging the law passed this year that, among its provisions, requires voters to show a government-issued photo ID card before getting a ballot on election day.
Friday's hearing was the first official chance for attorney Thor Hearne to present his evidence, after Callahan allowed the St. Louis lawyer to intervene in the case on behalf of state Sen. Delbert Scott, R-Lowry City, who helped write the controversial law.
“What we're trying to do is get into the (legal) record facts, studies, science (and) hard data that shows that this is something that's popular with all Missouri voters,” Hearne said, “for good reason, because it increases confidence and participation in our election process.”
Hearne's offerings include an affidavit from Scott, “who goes through the legislative history (of the law and) notes this is a comprehensive election reform,” Hearne told Callahan.
Hearne also represents Dale Morris, described as a poor, elderly, disabled St. Louis County voter who supports the law.
Secretary of State Robin Carnahan and Revenue Director Trish Vincent have been debating the number of registered Missouri voters who don't, now, have a proper ID, saying it's somewhere between 170,000 and 241,000 people.
Hearne's evidence also includes statements from two University of Missouri-Columbia political science professors who “say that this Missouri Voter Protection Act and the photo ID provisions are not going to affect, first off, that many Missourians,” he told reporters after Friday's hearing.
“They're not going to prevent any Missourians from casting a ballot and, in fact, they're going to increase confidence in the election process.”
Hearne also wants Callahan to consider statements from:
* A California economics professor.
* Indiana's secretary of state who works with a similar ID law that was upheld by the courts.
* Two St. Louis area elections officials who would contradict testimony given by other St. Louis election officials during an Aug. 21 hearing.
* A woman who served on the Carter-Baker Commission that has recommended better identification requirements for U.S. voters.
Newman represents the city governments of St. Louis and Kansas City and the governments of Jackson and St. Louis counties. His suit argues the new law violates 1980's “Hancock Amendment” to the state Constitution, imposing costs on local governments without paying them for the additional duties.
St. Louis attorney Don Downing - a former assistant attorney general - filed a second suit on behalf of a number of individuals, arguing the new law's requirements will keep the registered voters from being able to vote.
“I think the parties were able to explain to the judge what the evidence was,” Downing said. “It's a lot of information for him to digest.”
Downing asked Callahan to reject most of Hearne's evidence, arguing it was more public policy debate than focused on the legal points raised by the two lawsuits challenging the law.
Downing's suit says the Voter ID requirement violates Missouri's constitutional language that all properly registered Missourians “are entitled to vote at all elections by the people” if they go to the right polling place.
But, Hearne told reporters: “We have a whole host of requirements to make sure everybody votes once and that that vote is counted. ...
“In St. Louis, we had Ritzy the Dog who was registered to vote, so you can get on the voter role without being a person.”
Newman said, “Speed is important here because, regardless of the prevailing party in this court, there will be appeals to the Missouri Supreme Court, and there's a short time-span to allow for those appeals.”
Newman and Downing want Callahan to block the law, which went into effect Monday.
“It is in effect and will remain in effect until such time as Judge Callahan issues an injunction preventing further enforcement of the law,” Newman said.
All attorneys expect the case to be appealed.
“I think all parties recognize that it's very important that the Missouri Supreme Court speak on this issue in sufficient time before the general election,” Downing said, “so that all the local election authorities know what rules they're operating under.”
 |
 |
|
| Tobacco tax ballot status uncertain | Sprint moves to establish new call center |
Article Rating |
|
Before commenting read the News Tribune Forum's policies and procedures.
Thanks.
To add your comments you must be registered and logged in |
RSS
