Second lawsuit seeks to block voter photo ID law

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. -- Opponents of a new state requirement for voters to show a government-issued photo identification filed a second lawsuit Thursday, claiming it could discourage or prevent people from voting this November. The lawsuit's plaintiffs include several Missourians qualified to vote who say they lack an acceptable ID under the new law and hence could not cast a regular ballot in the Nov. 7 general election. Another plaintiff is Give Missourians a Raise Inc., a group backing a potential November ballot measure to raise the state's minimum wage. The group claims it would be harmed because some people who support their cause might not be able to vote. Supporters of the ID requirement say it's necessary to give people confidence in elections and prevent fraud.

The challenge was filed in Cole County Circuit Court in Jefferson City. The first lawsuit was filed in July with the same court by Democratic St. Louis and Kansas City elected officials, who claimed the law unconstitutionally imposes costs on local governments without providing state funding. No hearing has been set.

Thursday's suit gets more to the heart of the matter, saying the photo ID requirement infringes on the right to vote under the Missouri Constitution.

"This requirement imposes an unnecessary, unauthorized and undue burden on the fundamental right to vote of at least 170,000 registered Missouri voters who do not currently possess a photo ID," the lawsuit states.

The state Democratic Party is financially supporting the lawsuit.

"It is no surprise that Democrats are again rushing off to the courthouse to oppose a law that ensures honest elections under sensible even-handed rules," Republican Party spokesman Paul Sloca said in a written statement.

Several other states also have battles over voter ID requirements.

Federal and state courts recently blocked enforcement of a Georgia law requiring voters to show a photo ID. U.S. District Judge Harold Murphy said the Georgia requirement discriminated against people who don't have driver's licenses, passports or other government identification.

But in Indiana, U.S. District Judge Sarah Evans Barker ruled in April that its photo ID law could stand because Democrats failed to show it was too burdensome. Voters in a May primary election were required to show a state or federally issued photo identification card before casting ballots. Barker's decision has been appealed.

The Missouri suit also claims the requirement imposes illegal costs on those trying to obtain a photo ID -- not for the ID itself, which is free, but for other documentation that is required to get one, such as a birth certificate -- in violation of the constitution's equal-protection clause. A certified birth certificate is among paperwork people can use to prove they are lawfully in the country. For those born in Missouri, it costs $15.

The lawsuit also claims the requirement unfairly harms black and female voters, along with the poor, elderly or disabled who may not drive and have no license. Women would be particularly affected, the suit says, because they need extra documents for an ID card if their birth certificate is not in their current name, as is often the case for those who are married.

In addition, the lawsuit says the law discriminates among types of voters, as those who cast an absentee ballot face no changes and thus don't have to meet the photo ID requirement.

The lawsuit seeks a preliminary injunction to block the law from taking effect as it otherwise would on Aug. 28 and to have the law declared unconstitutional.

Voters who lack the proper ID in November can cast a provisional ballot, which will count if they present an ID allowed under the old law, they're in the right polling place and election officials can verify their identities. From the 2008 general election on, only the elderly, disabled and those with religious objections can vote without a proper ID, and then only by a provisional ballot.

The lawsuit also questions the stated purpose of preventing fraud, saying there have been more problems with fake voter registration cards than people showing up at polls impersonating someone else.

"It is statistically more likely for a Missourian to be struck by a bolt of lightning than to have his or her vote canceled by someone posing as another voter to cast a ballot," the lawsuit said.

The suit alleges supporters of the ID requirement were simply trying to prevent minorities and others who tend to support Democrats from voting.

While the focus of the lawsuit is that the requirement is costly and burdensome for people, which could discourage them from voting, plaintiffs' attorney Don Downing, of St. Louis, said some people could not obtain an ID card if they tried.

People born in other states, for example, may need birth certificates from there to get a Missouri card -- and some other states require a photo ID to obtain a birth certificate. Also, the lawsuit raises concerns that people won't get the needed documents in time.