State Supreme Court Refuses to Hear Voter ID Cases

The high court's decisions mean that the appeals court will hear the cases first. A trial that started today will continue.

The state Supreme Court Monday refused to hear Voter ID cases stemming from suits brought by two different plaintiffs.

Justices issued one-page opinions on each of the lawsuits from the Milwaukee NAACP and the , but declined to comment on why they refuse to hear either one, according to WisPolitics.com.

A temporary injunction was issued first by one Dane County judge and a . There is a trial that started today and now will proceed based on lawsuits filed by the Milwaukee branch of the NAACP and Voces de la Frontera. Both groups claim the law, which requires voters to show a photo ID before they can cast a ballot, disenfranchises minorities, the elderly, the disabled and students among others.

The state Department of Justice has appealed both injunctions, and it was the appellate court that asked the Supreme Court to review the cases. Now that the state's high court has refused to hear either case, both suits are back under the appeals court's jurisdiction.

Keith Schmitz April 18, 2012 at 03:20 AM
Again with the dumb arguments over voter ID vs something else. We have abundant proof that gun laws have been violated, and hardly any in regards to voter ID. In fact on that basis, we should even be providing conceal carry.
Robert Richardson April 18, 2012 at 07:13 AM
You are RIGHT! I own a house and I have to prove my residence and eligibility to vote nearly every 4 years. It's a pain but I would rather have it than have someone who can't legally vote decide my destiny!
Robert Richardson April 18, 2012 at 07:18 AM
Can i join you Steve? He dropped my property taxes 5% last year!
Randy1949 April 18, 2012 at 03:29 PM
@Robert Richardson -- Really? You have to re-register every four years? You must move a lot. I registered in my current polling place back in 1971 and haven't had to since.
John Williams April 18, 2012 at 05:12 PM
@Randy1949 -- Your position holds merit for those people. However I am not refering to those individuals. There were a couple people used as examples by the NAACP, one being an older black man who was a disabled veteran, yet he was being made to jump through hoops to get his free ID. First he applied for a social security card, where he was informed that he needed a birth certificate. Then when he got his birth certificate found that it had his birthname (the name his mother gave him) and that he did not choose to use that name (he has been using an alias his whole life!). At some point he had to have either/both a birth certificate and/or a social security card, otherwise he would not have been able to serve in the military and/or collect disability payments. He does not fall into your rapidly vanishing group. The other example given was a single mother from Mississippi who could not locate her birth certificate because of fire/flood issues. explain then how she was able to obtain benefits here in wisconsin to support herself and her 7 children, one of which is getting social security disability every month, if she has never had any form of identification in the form of a birth certificate or a social security card? Im a democrat and a liberal, and I firmly believe in verified ID. Heck I also think everyone should have a DNA sample on file with their prints and current photo! Think how quickly all those non supported babies would have their daddies found!


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »