Civil rights groups challenging Alabama’s 2011 photo voter ID law — which received additional scrutiny after the state closed dozens of its DMV offices last year — suffered a setback when a federal judge Wednesday refused to block a provision of the law ahead of March’s primary election.
The Alabama NAACP and other groups, as part of a larger suit challenging the law, had asked the federal court for an emergency injunction to block the the law on the basis of its “positively identify” provision. That portion of the law provides that if a potential voter doesn’t have the proper photo ID, two poll officials can personally confirm their identity in an affidavit. The challengers argued that the provision harkened back to Jim Crow-era voucher tests. They were seeking a ruling that those without the photo ID to be allowed to answer questions confirming their identity or use the IDs accepted before the 2011 law instead.
In his order filed, U.S. District Judge L. Scott Coogler — a President George W. Bush-appointee — suggested the request was “a backdoor method of invalidating” the law.
He also expressed skepticism that the case would succeed on the merits and raised doubts that the challengers have standing to bring the case.
“Moreover, NAACP has not specifically identified one of its members who does not possess a photo ID and intends to vote, and Greater Birmingham Ministries has not alleged whether G.A. is a member of its organization and further whether she is a United States citizen eligible to vote in the upcoming elections,” Coogler wrote.
G.A. is an 18-year-old Latina, cited by the NAACP in its initial complaint, who did not have the proper photo ID to vote and had difficulty attaining it because of lack of transportation and because her parents worked long hours.
In addition to refusing the injunction, Coogler asked the parties to brief him on the questions of standing.
Read the order below:
That portion of the law provides that if a potential voter doesn’t have the proper photo ID, two poll officials can personally confirm their identity in an affidavit.
Can’t appeal it to SCOTUS either. The predictable 4-4 decision there would mean this decision would stand.
Look for much more of these shenanigans
This is what really scares me about the election. I just wonder how much has been done or is being done by outside advocacy groups to get these people outfitted with the proper IDs
For Pete’s sake, would somebody just give these people a ride?