Seventh Circuit Denies Wisc Voter ID En Banc Motion Five-to-Five

Next step is a likely Emergency Petition to the U.S. Supreme Court for the right to vote.

Desperate Scott Walker will of course oppose petition to the U.S. Supreme Court, the more Wisconsin voters casting their preference the more likely Scott Walker loses.

Writes Rick Hasen: "... this is a really egregious order changing the rules midstream in violation of the Supreme Court’s own admonition in the Purcell v. Gonzalez case; and (b) now that the Court has before it the Ohio case, presenting a similar section 2 Voting Rights Act issue but with much worse facts for voting rights advocates, it would be better for this to be up there at the same time.  So there’s not much to lose to get this case before the Court at the same time."

The Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit writes: "On September 12, 2014, a panel of this court stayed the injunction that the district court had issued. Plaintiffs have filed a motion for reconsideration, asking the court to vacate the stay and reinstate the injunction. The panel that issued the stay has voted to deny the motion for reconsideration. A judge called for a vote on the request for a hearing en banc. That request is denied by an equally divided court. Chief Judge Wood and Judges Posner, Rovner, Williams, and Hamilton voted to hear this matter en banc. In the coming days, members of the court may file opinions explaining their votes."

The ludicrous rulings piling up, around the world press is starting to take notice.

The ACLU released the following comment:

CHICAGO — The full Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals today declined to rehear a three-judge panel's order reinstating Wisconsin's voter ID law prior to the midterm election. The vote was split evenly, 5-5, meaning the panel's order stands. Neither the panel nor the full court has yet ruled on the actual merits of the law, which was found unconstitutional by a federal judge in April. The American Civil Liberties Union is challenging the law, and petitioned for a full appeals court review following the panel's order on September 12 allowing the law to take effect. The ACLU presented oral arguments to the panel that day asking the court to uphold the April decision striking down the law as unconstitutional and in violation of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.

The following is a statement from Dale Ho, director of the ACLU's Voting Rights Project:

"Allowing this law to take effect so close to the midterm election is a recipe for chaos, voter confusion, and disenfranchisement. The court could have avoided this pandemonium and given Wisconsin voters a chance to cast their ballots free of obstruction. It failed to do so, and we are evaluating our next step."

The ACLU, the ACLU of Wisconsin, the National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty, and Dechert LLP are co-counsel in this case, Frank v. Walker, challenging Wisconsin's voter ID law.

At trial last November, the groups presented evidence showing that hundreds of thousands of Wisconsin voters lacked ID; that African-American and Latino voters, who have been subjected to historical and continuing segregation and discrimination in Wisconsin, were far more likely to lack ID and the documents needed to get ID than whites; that there are significant burdens imposed on voters trying to get ID; and that the government lacks strong enough reason to impose these burdens. A federal court agreed and struck down the law on April 29, prompting the state's appeal.

A copy of today's ruling is at:
aclu.org/voting-rights/frank-v-walker-order

More information about this case is at:
aclu.org/voting-rights/frank-v-walker-fighting-voter-suppression-wisconsin

Meahwhile, named co-plaintiff, Ruthelle Frank writes in The Guardian: "I’ve been registered to vote since 1948. But once Republicans passed the [Voter ID] law, I was asked to prove I’m not an ‘illegal alien.'"

After Fourteen Days by Mail, Complain When You Cannot Vote in Wisconsin

Update: ACLU-Wisconsin and The Advancement Project announce filing for an en banc (full court) appellate hearing to "protect the voting rights of Wisconsin citizens" amid massive confusion.
---
Dial (608) 266-2353 of the Wisconsin DMV, press 3; then long phone-answering tree, then this recording: "If you are waiting for a driver license or identification card to arrive through the mail and it has been at least 14 days since you applied, press one now."

Fourteen days.

That means you have 21 legal days (assuming Jewish Holidays and Halloween are not legal holidays, fair assumption) left before Election Day to get a free a Wisconsin Photo Voter ID mailed to you from California.

Twenty-one days for some 300,000 residents.

Sounds like an undue burden when only one DMV office is open on weekends, and most DMV centers are part-time. According to an amicus brief filed by One Wisconsin Now (in a state case):

41 [DMVs] are open just two days each week, seven are open just a few hours for one day each month, and three are open just one day every quarter.… Only one DMV service center in the entire state of Wisconsin is open on a Saturday. No other DMV in the entire state operates in the evenings or on weekends ...

 If the 330,000 electors [without ID] attempted to obtain their ID during the one-month period preceding the election, the DMV would need to process on average 37 eligible electors each hour, every day of operation for the entire month. (cited by Berman)

Today, Wisconsin's Government Accountability Board (GAB) will meet with reporters discuss how they will implement the state's voter I.D. law.

Don't look for a GAB statement saying this is an undue burden and that eligible voters will be disenfranchised. Attorney Mike Haas may be a nice guy but he suffers from spaghetti spine, not a great condition for the Elections Division Administrator of the GAB.

We need an emergency appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court from lawyers with a belly, and a spine.

You see if I were in Mr. Haas' position I would issue a public statement that Scott Walker and the Republican Party are trying to stop eligible Wisconsin citizens from voting aided by an oppressive Republican-appointed federal judges who (still seems incredible) order Voter ID reinstated with just 23 legal days to go, 21 now and counting down.

Judge Frank Easterbrook Disappoints

Judge Frank Easterbrook (of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit) shamed himself.

Easterbrook is on the three-judge panel that ordered the reinstatement of Wisconsin Act 23, the photo voter ID law.

I expect this type of action in the Judiciary from the likes of Diane Sykes (one of Easterbrook's colleague on the panel), or from a decision in the Fifth or 11th circuits in the south.

Not from Easterbrook, who it appears did not give the panel's order much thought, staying the injunction 53 days out from Election Day without any stated concern.

"The record says virtually nothing about the difficulties faced by either indigent voters or voters with religious objections to being photographed. While one elderly man stated that he did not have the money to pay for a birth certificate, when asked if he did not have the money or did not wish to spend it, he replied, “both.” App. 211–212. From this limited evidence we do not know the magnitude of the impact SEA 483 will have on indigent voters in Indiana. The record does contain the affidavit of one homeless woman who has a copy of her birth certificate, but was denied a photo identification card because she did not have an address. Id., at 67. But that single affidavit gives no indication of how common the problem is." - (Justice Stevens opinion announcing the judgment of the Court and delivering an opinion in which The Chief Justice and Justice Kennedy in WILLIAM CRAWFORD, et al., PETITIONERS v. MARION COUNTY ELECTION BOARD et al (2008))

Compare this dearth of social scientific evidence in Crawford with the mountain of evidence presented in Frank v. Walker, (Case 11cv1128) and League of United Latin American Citizens of Wisconsin v. Deininger (Case 2:12-cv-00185).

What is Easterbrook thinking?

Yes, a plurality of three justices joined the opinion of the Court in Crawford in 2008 in which no trial took place.

So that's it forever? Crawford can never be overturned or altered; no matter what or how much evidence or argument is presented in federal court demonstrating its effect on real people whom Easterbrook seems to forget are these beings with emanating rights?

Consider: Footnote 6 from Crawford: "In other words, an estimated 99% of Indiana’s voting age population already possesses the necessary photo identification to vote under the requirements of SEA 483.” 458 F. Supp. 2d, at 807. Given the availability of free photo identification and greater public awareness of the new statutory requirement, presumably that percentage has increased since SEA 483 was enacted and will continue to increase in the future."

Some 10 per cent are estimated in Wisconsin to lack the proper ID. That extra nine in Wisconsin as opposed to Indiana was found at trial to compose some 300,000 voters.

So, Wisconsin has had since Monday opportunity for greater public awareness of the new statutory requirement to vote, and the some 300,000 Wisconsin citizens who are eligible to vote but don't have a GOP-approved ID.

No substantive problem for Easterbrook.

But consider this from Easterbrook and his two colleagues order last week: "It [U.S. District Judge Lynn Adelman] did this [issued a permanent injunction] based on findings that it thought showed that Wisconsin did not need this law to promote an important governmental interest, and that persons of lower income (disproportionately minorities) are less likely to have driver’s licenses, other acceptable photo ID, or the birth certificates needed to obtain them, which led the court to hold that the statute violates §2 of the Voting Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. §1973." 

No.

The panel misstates Judge Adelman's ruling in this strange formulation: "Wisconsin did not need this law to promote an important governmental interest." Adelman is not in the legislating business.

This did-not-need-this-law sentence is amateur stuff, and surely was not written by Easterbrook.

What Adelman did find is that no state interest was served by Wisconsin Act 23's mandate to present a photo ID as a condition to vote to stop in-person voter fraud, a crime which even the State of Wisconsin admitted it could not produce even one instance of ever occurring.

In fact, Adelman's opinion, as a good opinion should, well considers the State's justifications for Act 23, and takes them apart.

"Wisconsin Republicans ... four justifications for the Photo ID restriction: "(1) detecting and preventing in-person voter-impersonation fraud; (2) promoting public confidence in the integrity of the electoral process; (3) detecting and deterring 'other types of voter fraud;' and 4) promoting orderly election administration and accurate recordkeeping." (Canning, The Brad Blog)

Against this Adelman found as fact that potentially some 300,000 Wisconsin voters lack the restrictive form of ID.

Adelman proceeded to use the balancing test, the Anderson/Burdick test, that six members of the Crawford Court said is appropriate essentially finding that ZERO voter in-person voter fraud against some 300,000 weighs towards the 300,000.

I recommend Easterbrook read Ernest A. Canning's work on this matter, and maybe have a chat with Judge Richard Posner.

Electoral Chaos in Wisconsin Begins

Update: New York Times: Rick Hasen: "It is hard enough to administer an election with set rules — much less to change the rules midstream."
---
The ruling by the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit has election clerks and the Wisconsin GAB wondering what to do now that the Court has seen it fit to change the rules on the eve of the election and carry out the GOP objective: Chaos and voter obstruction.

Almost 12,000 absentee ballots have already been mailed out.

The Wisconsin Government Accountability Board (GAB) notes there is one set of rules for some voters and another set for other voters:

"Absentee ballots that are mailed will need to include uniform instructions depending upon the type of voter which incorporate directions about the photo ID requirement.  For that reason, municipalities are directed not to mail out any additional absentee ballots until the G.A.B. issues those uniform instructions which will occur as soon as possible."

Military and permanent overseas voters are exempt from the photo ID requirement."

The GAB also notes: "The Government Accountability Board will communicate additional guidance to local election officials next (this) week, which will include instructions regarding the processing of absentee ballots which have already been issued."

This means apparently that different sets of ballots are processed under different rules.

Some voters will have to follow the law, others will not.

Rick Hasen notes:

Friday’s 7th Circuit order was the height of irresponsibility which did not even bother to consider or mention the difficulty of rolling out voter id when the voting process had already started. 

Someone wise once said: “Court orders affecting elections, especially conflicting orders, can themselves result in voter confusion and consequent incentive to remain away from the polls. As an election draws closer, that risk will increase.” Oh yeah, it was the U.S. Supreme Court. Why didn’t the Seventh Circuit listen?

Elsewhere, Ari Berman points out Wisconsin features a unique set of facts and arguments in light of Crawford v. Marion County, which is supposed to be a content and state-specific ruling, suggesting an emergency hearing by the U.S. Supreme Court or the Court of Appeals and soon.

Willful Ignorance, Complexity and Corruption in Wisconsin Voter ID Ruling

One wonders since the new DMV service center policy is cited in Ruthelle Frank v. Scott Walker (14-2058), as is the Milwaukee Branch of NAACP v. Walker ruling, does the record also include One Wisconsin Now's Amicus Curiae Brief detailing how "Obtaining a State-Issued ID Is Difficult, Inconvenient, Impracticable, and –For Some –Insurmountable," and the lack of "Wisconsin’s DMV Inaccessibility Creates A Voter Access Issue."
 
The brief is worth checking out and certainly should be included in an emergency appeal and should be a topic of federal court deliberation.
---
Judge Richard Posner of the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit is the author of the Crawford v. Marion County Election Board  opinion (2007) [one year later came a U.S. Supreme Court confused landmark case with a plurality opinion authored by Justice Stevens (since retracted) from which the order from the Seventh Circuit's panel used to justify its extraordinary ruling changing the Wisconsin voting landscape some 50 days out from Election Day.]

It is appropriate that Judge Posner, a leading public intellectual and legal scholar, notes in his Reflections on Judging (Harvard University Press. 2013) that the educational background of fellow Justices and judges reflects the belief that law is a humanity rather than a science or at least a social science. (p. 81)

Posner, appointed to the bench in 1981, has turned into the conscience of the Seventh Circuit, and conscience and fidelity to the principles animating the dispassionate and fair deliberation of the law is missing from Frank v. Walker and its companion case.

"We are very disappointed in the damaging decision to lift the injunction against [Wisconsin] Voter ID, which will cause chaos and disruption for voters and elections workers for the November election.  The state has not demonstrated it is prepared to make this new ID scheme work.  The new procedures were presented at the last second and it is unclear whether or how they will work in time to ensure that eligible voters are actually able to vote. It has not demonstrated how it will train 1,852 municipal clerks and tens of thousands of poll workers, as well as notifying voters of the new rules. We will continue to review and closely monitor this decision," writes Chris Ahmuty, ACLU of Wisconsin Executive Director.

Wisconsin's Act 23 is one of the most restrictive Republican-authored voter obstruction state laws exceeded perhaps only by Texas and North Carolina, all three of which are intended to block as many disfavored citizens as possible from casting votes, with an emphasis on ethnic minorities, most of whom in Wisconsin reside in one county.

Clayton Kawski, an assistant Wisconsin attorney general, sounded more like a politician of the likes of Scott Walker and the odious Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-White People) than a jurist in oral arguments, using the GOP catch phrase "common sense" numerous times to justify the constitutionality of this clearly unconstitutional law, (Davey, NYT) even citing for the panel the perceived popularity of Act 23 as a polling data point.

"The district court [Judge Lynn Adelman] held the state law invalid, and enjoined its implementation, even though it is materially identical to Indiana’s photo ID statute, which the Supreme Court held valid in Crawford v. Marion County Election Board, 553 U.S. 181 (2008)," reads yesterday's appellate order.

Materially identical?

This is ironic language to use for the Wisconsin law vis a vis Indiana's.

Last year in U.S. district court Wisconsin featured a long trial at which was presented a mountain of testimony and social scientific evidence demonstrating that Wisconsin's photo voter ID law would disenfranchise potentially 100,000s, while also demonstrating that only one case of voter impersonation voter fraud occurred out of 10s of Millions of votes cast going back to 2004.

No such trial took place in Indiana in 2007-08, yet the appellate panel finds as fact that the two state laws are materially identical; based on what evidence, what examination, what trial?

Judge Posner commenting on the challenge of complexity in federal litigation notes that a careful examination of evidence is imperative if the rights of citizens under law are to be realized by a judiciary that often misses the mark.

"I plead guilty to having written the majority opinion (affirmed by the Supreme Court) upholding Indiana's requirement that prospective voters prove their identity with a photo id—a law now widely regarded as a means of voter suppression rather than fraud prevention." (pp. 84–85)

Notes Posner, "Consider what judges do when they don't understand the activity from which a case before them has arisen. They duck, bluff, weave, change the subject." (pp 85-86)

This is precisely what the appellate panel has done, writing: "After the district court’s decision, the Supreme Court of Wisconsin revised the procedures to make it easier for persons who have difficulty affording any fees to obtain the birth certificates or other documentation needed under the law, or to have the need for documentation waived. Milwaukee Branch of NAACP v. Walker, 2014 WI 98 (July 31, 2014). This reduces the likelihood of irreparable injury, and it also changes the balance of equities and thus the propriety of federal injunctive relief. The panel has concluded that the state’s probability of success on the merits of this appeal is sufficiently great that the state should be allowed to implement its law, pending further order of this court."

Actually, the new policy is not in effect until Monday and the sophistication of DMV clerk, the dearth of DMV centers in Wisconsin and the ability to travel to DMV centers are of no apparent concern to Easterbrook, Sykes and Tinder.

Acting as an obtuse judiciary, Judges Easterbrook, Sykes and Tinder are at best willfully ignorant:

Notes Judge Adelman in his April 2014 opinion that is meticulously crafted:

"Although it is true that those individuals who already have IDs must have at one time experienced the burdens and inconveniences of obtaining them (and must continue to experience the burdens and inconveniences of keeping their IDs valid), the photo ID requirement creates a unique barrier for those who would not obtain a photo ID but for Act 23." (pp 22-23)

The three judges are redolent of George W. Bush during Hurricane Katrina:

'Why don't you just hop in the SUV and take your family and make sure everyone has their IDs in order and the DMV will help you now' echoes George W. Bush's inability to understand why families didn't evacuate when the approach of Katrina gave them days warning in 2005. [In a historical irony, Bush's perceived indifference to African Americans led Karl Rove to push Congress into a 25-year extension of the Voting Rights Act, which proving too beneficial to African Americans and Latinos' voting so it had to be gutted by the GOP judiciary on the U.S. Supreme Court.]

The socioeconomic reality and the new precondition to vote imposed by Act 23 escapes Easterbrook, Sykes and Tinder who can only see a similarity in the text of state laws, but remain oblivious to the reality of the lives—though presented in the record with a huge body of evidence whom the law serves.

I have to believe Easterbrook is willfully ignorant and Sykes and Tinder are corrupt.

In the Easterbrook-Sykes-Tinder order, the panel cites Milwaukee Branch of NAACP v. Walker, 2014 WI 98 (July 31, 2014).

It is worth noting that "... Wisconsin will still have only one DMV location that is open during the weekend, on Madison's west side. By comparison, Indiana has 124 DMV centers that are open during the weekend." (Roller, Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel)

One wonders since the new DMV service center policy is cited; as is the Milwaukee Branch of NAACP v. Walker ruling, does the record also include One Wisconsin Now's Amicus Curiae Brief detailing how "Obtaining a State-Issued ID Is Difficult, Inconvenient, Impracticable, and –For Some –Insurmountable." and the lack of "Wisconsin’s DMV Inaccessibility Creates A Voter Access Issue."

The brief is worth checking out and certainly should be included in an emergency appeal and should be a topic of federal court deliberation.

Seventh Circuit Reinstates Wisconsin's Photo Voter ID Law 53 Days from Election Day

Massive Mobilization Required to Offset This Incredible Ruling - Needed Now: Mass Applications for Your Municipality's Special Registration Deputy Appointment

Updated - Scott Walker is trying to steal this election, and Republicans on the judiciary are happy to help.

A three-judge panel has stayed the federal court injunction against mandatory photo voter ID in Wisconsin, reinstating the photo voter ID law in a spectacular ruling.

"The State of Wisconsin may, if it wishes (and if it is appropriate under rules of state law), enforce the photo ID requirement in this November's elections. The appeals remain under advisement, and an opinion on the merits will issue in due course," the three Republican-appointed judges ordered.

Republicans do so wish.

Reports the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel (Marley and Stein):

The appellate court said Friday that it was satisfied by changes imposed on the law by the Wisconsin Supreme Court in a separate decision earlier this year.
"This reduces the likelihood of irreparable injury, and it also changes the balance of equities and thus the propriety of federal injunctive relief. The panel has concluded that the state's probability of success on the merits of this appeal is sufficiently great that the state should be allowed to implement its law, pending further order of this court," the order reads.
The head of the state's election agency said Friday he would do everything possible to get the law back in place in time for the election — something agency officials previously said would be a challenge.

Hundreds of thousands of Wisconsin citizens do not have a photo voter ID, and the ruling will result in a sprint to the local DMV to obtain an ID.

Huge lines will also likely be a consequence of the ruling, due to Scott Walker and the GOP's shortening of the early voting period.

Politically, the judicial ruling is an active (dynamic) and not a static development, meaning the voter obstruction intent of Wisconsin Act 23 will likely produce a reaction among targeted demographics of the GOP, including minorities, college students, disaffected veterans, the elderly and the homeless.

Confusion, long lines and frustration will be hallmarks of the November 4 Election Day, objective achieved by Scott Walker and the Republican Party.
---
United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit Chicago, Illinois 60604  
September 12, 2014  
Before 
FRANK H. EASTERBROOK, Circuit Judge 
DIANE S. SYKES, Circuit Judge 
JOHN DANIEL TINDER, Circuit Judge    
Nos. 14-2058 and 14-2059 
RUTHELLE FRANK, et al.,  Plaintiffs-Appellees, 
  v. 
SCOTT WALKER, in his official capacity as Governor of State of Wisconsin, et al.,  Defendants-Appellants.
Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin. 
Nos. 11-CV-01128 and 12-CV-00185 Lynn Adelman, Judge.  
LEAGUE OF UNITED LATIN AMERICAN CITIZENS OF WISCONSIN, et al.,  Plaintiffs-Appellees, 
  v. 
DAVID G. DEININGER, et al.,  Defendants-Appellants.     
Case: 14-2059      Document: 65            Filed: 09/12/2014      Pages: 2
Nos. 14-2058 and 14-2059  Page 2   
Order 
 On August 21, 2014, this court issued an order providing that the motion for a stay would be considered by the panel assigned to decide the case on the merits. This order further provided that the state was free, in the interim, to implement the changes to the procedures for obtaining (or excusing reliance on) birth certificates, and similar documents, that the Supreme Court of Wisconsin adopted in Milwaukee Branch of NAACP v. Walker, 2014 WI 98 (July 31, 2014). 

 Having read the briefs and heard oral argument, this court now stays the injunction issued by the district court. The State of Wisconsin may, if it wishes (and if it is appropriate under rules of state law), enforce the photo ID requirement in this November’s elections. 

 The district court held the state law invalid, and enjoined its implementation, even though it is materially identical to Indiana’s photo ID statute, which the Supreme Court held valid in Crawford v. Marion County Election Board, 553 U.S. 181 (2008). It did this based on findings that it thought showed that Wisconsin did not need this law to promote an important governmental interest, and that persons of lower income (disproportionately minorities) are less likely to have driver’s licenses, other acceptable photo ID, or the birth certificates needed to obtain them, which led the court to hold that the statute violates §2 of the Voting Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. §1973. 

After the district court’s decision, the Supreme Court of Wisconsin revised the procedures to make it easier for persons who have difficulty affording any fees to obtain the birth certificates or other documentation needed under the law, or to have the need for documentation waived. Milwaukee Branch of NAACP v. Walker, 2014 WI 98 (July 31, 2014). This reduces the likelihood of irreparable injury, and it also changes the balance of equities and thus the propriety of federal injunctive relief. The panel has concluded that the state’s probability of success on the merits of this appeal is sufficiently great that the state should be allowed to implement its law, pending further order of this court. 

 The appeals remain under advisement, and an opinion on the merits will issue in due course.

Voter ID Makes It Easier to Vote, Says Wisconsin DoJ Atty

"(Requiring photo voter ID) will make it easier to vote," said Wisconsin Department of Justice (DOJ) Assistant Attorney General Clayton Kawski during oral arguments today (14-2058; Ruthelle Frank v. Scott Walker).

This is an absurd statement and is representative of the nature of the argumentation from the voter obstruction party with Scott Walker and Wisconsin Atty General J.B. Van Hollen at the helm in Wisconsin.

As a veteran election inspector who worked the low turn-out affair in February 2012 Spring primary in the one election when photo voter ID was used in Wisconsin (no statewide election were held that day), I can attest that some two to three minutes are added to the voting process for each voter, a time unit that is increased exponentially during high turn-out elections when there will be long lines.

Each voter's extra time is added to the voters' waiting in line in high turnout affairs.

As for a single voter operating under a photo voter ID law, each voter reports to the voter roll's table, states her name and address and then presents her ID.

The ID is then checked by two election inspectors both of whom check names, dates, photo resemblance, check against acceptable photo IDs, hands back the ID before handing a voter number and sending the voter to the ballot table to pick up a ballot.

This is a substantial delay, and would make for lines resembling Florida and Ohio.

Panel Hears Scott Walker's Desperate Plea to Reinstate Voter ID 53 Days Before Election Day

Seventh Circuit Reinstates Wisconsin's Photo Voter ID Law 53 Days from Election Day

Update: Oral arguments are up online; 14-2058  Ruthelle Frank v. Scott Walker.

Questioning the wisdom and practicality of lifting Judge Lynn Adelman's permanent injunction of  Wisconsin's restrictive Photo Voter ID law (Act 23) a three-judge appellate panel has left uncertainty over whether the law will be in force during the coming November election in 53 days.

After some analysis, mal contends asserts lifting Judge Adelman's injunction would be an outrage for an appellate circuit that prides itself on scholarly opinions, so one can rest easy. Look for a quick decision denying Scott Walker's attempt to shrink the Wisconsin electorate.

The Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit is not the Wisconsin Supreme Court, a discredited institution with about the same creditability as the Wisconsin State Assembly.

The case, Walker v. Frank (consolidated with a case bought by the Wisconsin chapter of the League of United Latin American Citizens) was heard this morning by a three-judge panel of the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.

Oral arguments will be available online this afternoon at the Court's site.

The three judges hearing the case today are Judges Frank Easterbrook, Diane Sykes (rightwing activist appointed by W. Bush) and John Tinder (rightwing activist appointed by W. Bush).

Judge Dianne Sykes questioning the voting rights attorney, John Ulin, opined that the voters had won a "whooper" of a remedy in Adelman's injunction, reports Patrick Marley of Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.

Sykes also noted the Dept of Justice attorney was asking for lifting a stay on the "eve of an election."

At a federal trial last year, Judge Adelman found zero cases of voter impersonation (a finding of fact admitted by the Dept of Justice attorney at trial) and a mountain of social scientific evidence that as many 300,000 eligible and registered Wisconsin voters could lose their right to vote should Wisconsin's Act 23 be given the green light and Adelman's injunction be stayed during further adjudication in federal court.

"He took evidence and found the Supreme Court was wrong," Easterbrook said referring to the Crawford vs. Marion County Elections Board case (2008).

Easterbrook is likely pointing out that vis a vis Crawford, Walker v. Frank (and the consolidated case) feature a mountain of social scientific evidence presented at trial and on the record.

As attorney Earnest Canning notes this May in the Brad Blog: Crawford used the "Anderson/Burdick test, which requires the courts, on a case-by-case basis, to measure a law's potential damage to voters' right to vote, against the specific claims made by the state as to why such additional burdens and restrictions are necessary."

Applied to the Wisconsin voter ID law, it was established at trial that zero cases of impersonation voter fraud exists versus 100,000s of eligible Wisconsin voters losing their franchise to vote under Act 23.

This would certainly suggest a likelihood of success for voting rights advocates in further federal litigation and point for maintaining the injunction.

Canning notes, "As Judge Adelman observed, Crawford lacked a 'majority opinion'" --- that is an opinion in which five Justices agreed on the reasons for the decision. Instead, there were four separate opinions: a lead opinion written by Justice John Paul Stevens (joined by Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Kennedy), a concurring opinion written by Justice Antonin Scalia (joined by Justices Thomas and Alito), a dissenting opinion written by Justice David Souter (joined by Justice Ginsburg) and a separate dissent by Justice Breyer."

Justice Stevens writes that Crawford is "is state-specific and record-specific."

Judge Adelman writes the state interest in detecting and deterring alleged voter fraud is vanishingly small "because virtually no voter impersonation occurs in Wisconsin and it is exceedingly unlikely that voter impersonation will become a problem in Wisconsin in the foreseeable future, this particular state interest has very little weight." (p.11)

To get an idea of how restrictive Wisconsin's Act 23 is, consider that a Wisconsin polling worker (election inspector) who wears a photo ID issued by the municipality for whom she works would not be able to cast a vote under Act 23 if she showed up for work without further identification.

Wisconsin Act 23 was passed with exclusive Republican support and signed into law in 2011 as a voter obstruction measure that would add some two to three minutes to each voter's reporting to the voter roll's table, stating her name and address and then presenting her ID.

The ID is then checked by two election inspectors who check dates, photo resemblance, check against acceptable photo IDs before handing a voter number and sending the voter to the ballot table to pick up a ballot.

In a high turnout election such as this coming general election, the lines would be vastly increased and polling places will be understaffed, as rightwing voter observers stood three feet behind the voting rolls' tables and loudly voiced opinions. [The latter will happen.]

Confusion, frustration and obstruction remain Republican objectives.

Voter ID in Wisconsin likely will be one objective unmet.

Scott Walker Back at Appellate Court Asking for Photo ID Law Okay; Panel Includes Two Rightwing Judicial Activists

Update III: Oral arguments are up online; 14-2058  Ruthelle Frank v. Scott Walker.

Three-judge Appellate Panel Includes Two Rightwing Activist Judges

Update II: Orals online this afternoon on Court site. (14-2058, 14-2059)

Update - Rick Hasen points out that two of the panel voted for Crawford in a highly qualified FYI.

A desperate Scott Walker administration is back in federal appellate court asking a judicial panel to halt (stay) U.S. District Judge Lynn Adelman's permanent injunction against Wisconsin's Voter Law which remains unenforceable under a federal court order.

The cases to argued are Ruthelle Frank v. Scott Walker and LULAC v. Deininger (14-2058, 14-2059) consolidated for appeal with the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.

The panel hearing the cases is composed of Judges Frank Easterbrook, Diane Sykes (rightwing activist appointed by W. Bush). and John Tinder (rightwing activist appointed by W. Bush).

Walker filed for an expedited motion on August 5 to stay Judge Adelman's ruling, hoping that the photo voter ID law could be put into place to obstruct non-GOP-voting segments of the Wisconsin population for the November general election.

"The court will reserve decision on appellantʹs (Scott Walker and Wisconsin Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen (R)) motion to stay the permanent injunction until after oral argument on September 12, 2014," announced the appellate court on August 21.

Walker's attorneys working today to implement the GOP-passed photo voter ID law in the face of no evidence of photo impersonation and a mountain of evidence presented at federal trial last year demonstrating potentially 100,000s of Wisconsin citizens would be deprived of their right to vote is incredible and brash just 53 days out from Election Day.

The August 21 order also stated the Walker administration is free to implement the portion of the Wisconsin Supreme Court's vague order that the state DMV exercise discretion for persons who cannot afford the often substantial costs of obtaining birth certificates and other documents.

It would be extraordinary for the panel to stay Judge Adelman's injunction under two months before Election Day but Walker and Wisconsin Republicans bid for a long-shot ruling after implementing the discretionary cost-free order for supporting documentation to obtain free photo voter IDs has some pro-voting rights activists nervous.

Wisconsin Voter Obstruction Operative Sought and Received Scott Walker's Advice

Scott Walker and the party of voter obstruction are still doing their worst to deter the wrong kind of voters, especially voting while black.

More evidence from a story breaking of Scott Walker's dedication to the GOP's anti-voting project, as pro-voting advocates still play a defensive, reactive game.

Report Dan Bice and Bill Glauber in the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel:

A venture fund manager consulted with then-Milwaukee County Executive Scott Walker about state and federal voting laws in 2010, just weeks before the businessman began posting controversial ads on billboards in Milwaukee that warned "Voter Fraud is a Felony."

"Scott, I need to know the rules for illegal voting in Wisconsin," Stephen Einhorn wrote in an email on July 22, 2010. "Please check into the rules, including federal statutes. I need to know what the law is, if you violate it."

Einhorn continued, "I need this for some work that I am doing, and would appreciate your prompt response."

Walker forwarded the email to Cheryl Berdan, an assistant administrator in his office with the instructions, "Please help him out."

Until voting rights advocates, and this includes the Democratic Party, launch an offensive for voting rights, assholes like Stephen Einhorn and Scott Walker feel politically empowered to obstruct voting.

Today, Republicans know well that the higher the turnout, the lower the probability Scott Walker has of salvaging his shameful administration in November.

Scott Walker Should Be Subject of Contempt Hearing for Defying Judge Adelman's NO VOTER ID Order

Intent and Effect of the Blocked GOP Photo Voter ID Law Is to Obstruct, Confuse and Discourage People from Voting

No Voter IDs are needed in Wisconsin for any election as U.S. District Judge Lynn Adelman's order remains in effect.

Judge Adelman could not have been clearer, writing: "IT IS ORDERED that the named Defendants and Defendants’ officers, agents, servants, employees, and attorneys, and all those acting in concert or participation with them, or having actual or implicit knowledge of this Order by personal service or otherwise, are here by permanently enjoined from conditioning a person’s access to a ballot, either in-person or absentee, on that person’s presenting a form of photo identification." (p.70; emphasis in original)

But Scott Walker and the Republican Party's voter obstruction campaign continues, and yesterday Scott Walker pretended Judge Adelman's order and opinion of April 29, 2014 does not exist.

Scott Walker's office released a statement yesterday reading in part the "DMV is additionally offering to verify underlying documents, free of charge, to make sure everyone who wants an ID for the purpose of voting, is able to get one," (emphasis added) a transparently misleading press release, masquerading as a new policy in compliance with the Wisconsin Supreme Court's corrupt ruling on Act 23.

Walker did not mention that the photo voter ID law remains enjoined by Judge Adelman and no ID is needed for registered voters to cast a vote in Wisconsin.

A contempt hearing should be requested on the basis that a willfully misleading official communication from the Wisconsin Office of the Governor has the clear intent and effect of misleading and confusing Wisconsin citizens on the status of Act 23, per Adelman's injunction.

Is a misleading communication suggesting a person’s access for the purpose of voting is conditioned by presenting a form of Photo Voter ID contumacious of Judge Adelman's order?

An attorney can at the least make a good argument that this official communication by Scott Walker is contumacious and request a hearing.

Voting rights advocates need to get on the offense, a press release won't cut it.

Scott Walker is playing games and daring Adelman to act.

Writes Andrea Kaminski of the League of Women Voters of Wisconsin:

Statements by Governor Walker and other proponents of the ID law about a new process for obtaining an ID – which is not needed under the injunction – are misleading for a number of reasons. First, they neglect to say that the law is still blocked. Secondly, the statements claim that the photo ID law only hurts a few individuals, when strong evidence was presented in the courts showing that some 300,000 currently registered voters in our state do not possess an acceptable photo ID card, were the law in effect.

Finally, anyone who would suggest implementing voter ID at this late date before an election must have it out for election officials and voters alike. Implementation would affect absentee voting, and municipal clerks are already preparing to send out absentee ballots. They would have to amend the instructions and establish new procedures for processing the ballots. They do not have time in these busy final weeks to retrain their poll workers and educate voters.

The announcement of new procedures for obtaining an ID -- which is unneeded under the injunction – shows that the true intent of this law is not to improve elections but rather to cause confusion and discourage people from voting.

Stop Playing Dumb on Voter Obstruction

Update: Steve Schmidt, McCain-Palin top strategist: "It’s part of the mythology now in the Republican Party that there’s widespread voter fraud all across the country. In fact, there’s not."

One of the first public reactions to the Romney-Ryan ticket getting trounced at the 2012 polls was Paul Ryan's complaint about the urban vote.

"The surprise was some of the turnout, some of the turnout especially in urban areas, which gave President Obama the big margin to win this race," Ryan told WISC-TV. (Shear, Steinhauer. NYT)

Ryan knows what that mysterious "urban vote" means.  It means black votes, and they must be stopped. Voter fraud.

In the Wisconsin voter ID trial next Monday, November 4, as predictable as cold in a Wisconsin winter, we'll be treated to uncritical false equivalence press reports of "voter fraud" v. "voter rights".

That there is no in-person voter fraud is irrelevant, the media feels an obligation to play it dumb and present Ryan and the GOP fabrications as fact.

No matter the idiocy of the GOP lie, no matter the empirical truth of 100,000s being disenfranchised by the GOP-crafted photo voter ID law, the GOP objective of disenfranchising voters will not be reported.

I work as an elections inspector (poll worker). Most of the people voting are known by one or more of the poll workers, and the registered voter has to state her address and name, verified by two poll workers just to vote.

Election protection is not the objective of voter ID, GOP protection is.

The problem for the GOP is the Wisconsin Constitution is broad in the protection of voters against temporary partisan majorities, and the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, though not as sweeping is a powerful weapon used against those imposing voting obstruction.

The GOP has been working for years to add an additional qualification to vote, a photo voter ID, in violation of the Wisconsin Constitution.

This is a nationwide project, which is why there was a flurry of state voter ID laws right after five GOP justices declared section 4 the Voting Rights Act unconstitutional.

Voting rights remain under GOP attack.

Wisconsin Circuit Court Judge David T. Flanagan issued a permanent injunction on July 17, 2012 that remains in effect, writing:

The Wisconsin Supreme Court has often used the term "constitutionally qualified elector" to describe one eligible to vote in our state. That is because the Constitution, not the legislature or any law enacted by the legislature, is the source of the right to vote and unlike the United States Constitution, the Wisconsin Constitution sets forth explicitly the requirement for eligibility to vote, Art III, Sec 2 (4). The court must begin any consideration of voter eligibility legislation with the recognition of this bedrock constitutional foundation of Wisconsin voter eligibility.

The GOP is still passing legislative burdens to make voting more difficult or impossible for as many non-GOP voting citizens as the GOP can get away with.

That's the truth.

Wisconsin Voter ID Trial to Feature Mountain of Social Scientific Evidence

Update: See also Nicholas Stephanopoulos' piece on the Voting Rights Act and Section 2. "[E]ach [challenge under Section 2] failed because the plaintiffs couldn’t show that minorities were less likely than whites to possess valid IDs—proof that is now becoming more available. This means that Section 2 should be an increasingly useful weapon against the voting restrictions popping up around the country." Stephanopoulos points to a collaboration between Cal Tech and MIT by Charles Stewart III, entitled Racial Differences in Election Administration. The League of United Latin American Citizens of Wisconsin et al v. Deininger case is the first trial post- Holder v. Shelby County claiming a violation of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

GOP War on Voting, Spotlight Moving to Wisconsin

Those with even a passing interest in voting rights will be watching Wisconsin on November 4 when a highly politicized photo voter ID trial begins.

The entire, years-long Republican Party lie, or if one prefers falsehood, of purported massive in-person voter fraud will be put to trial and is in jeopardy, as will the GOP objective of disenfranchising non-GOP voters.

The trial follows the highly publicized recantation of Judge Richard Posner, the author of a federal appellate opinion that upheld Indiana’s voter ID law, whose theory of photo voter ID was used by the US Supreme Court in the case of Crawford v. Marion County Election Board, that has been touted as justification for voter obstruction laws in states across the country.

Once in power, GOP legislatures and governors across the nation raced to enact restrictive photo voter ID law since 2011.

"Defendants (Scott Walker et al) have not put forward any compelling government interest that their stringent photo ID law actually addresses—such as a single prosecution for in-person voter impersonation fraud in all of Wisconsin history—that would justify these oppressive burdens. For all these reasons, the law as applied to these classes violates the Fourteenth and Twenty-Fourth Amendments [poll tax] to the United States Constitution," reads the PLAINTIFFS’ CIVIL L. R. 16(c) PRETRIAL REPORT in Frank v. Walker.

The witness list includes academic experts, veterans, students and civil rights workers who will establish the undue burden imposed on 100,000s of Wisconsin citizens by Wisconsin Act 23, passed in 2011 with sole GOP support and unanimous opposition from civil rights groups.

For witness list, see PLAINTIFFS’ CIVIL L. R. 16(c) PRETRIAL REPORT in Frank v. Walker, and PLAINTIFFS’ CIVIL L. R. 16(c) PRETRIAL REPORT in League of United Latin American Citizens of Wisconsin et al v. Deininger et al.


The trial is expected to last some two weeks.

League of United Latin American Citizens of Wisconsin et al v. Deininger is the first trial post- Holder v. Shelby County claiming a violation of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

Judge Lynn Adelman (1997-present) will preside in Milwaukee.