LITTLE ROCK, Ark. - The Arkansas Supreme Court has tossed out a judge's ruling striking down the state's voter ID law, but stopped short of ruling on the constitutionality of the measure.
Justices on Wednesday vacated a Pulaski County judge's decision that the law violates Arkansas' constitution. Pulaski County Circuit Judge Tim Fox had struck down the law in a case that had focused on how absentee ballots are handled under the law, but justices stayed his ruling while they considered an appeal.
Justices said Fox didn't have the authority to strike down the law in the case focusing on absentee ballots. They noted that there was no request before Fox in the case to strike down the law.
"The question then becomes whether the constitutionality of the act was properly before the circuit court for a ruling. Based on the record before us, we must conclude that the answer to that question is no," Justice Paul Danielson wrote.
The court, however, upheld part of Fox's decision that a state panel didn't have the authority to give absentee voters additional time to show ID if they didn't include a copy of their identification with their ballot.
Fox has also ruled the law unconstitutional in a separate case, but said he wouldn't block its enforcement during this month's primary. That ruling is also being appealed to the high court.
Arkansas is amid early voting ahead of next Tuesday's primary.
The ruling comes as voter ID laws are being challenged throughout the nation. Though 31 states have laws in effect requiring voters to show some form of identification, Arkansas' in one of the strictest in the nation. Seven other states have photo ID requirements in effect similar to Arkansas.
A federal judge in Wisconsin struck down that state's voter ID law last month, and Pennsylvania's governor has said he wouldn't appeal a judge's recent ruling striking down his state's voter ID law. President Barack Obama last month waded into the voter ID debate, accusing Republicans of using restrictions to keep voters from the polls and jeopardizing 50 years of expanded voting access for millions of black Americans and other minorities.
Republicans backing voter ID laws in Arkansas and elsewhere have said the efforts are aimed at preventing voter fraud and protecting the integrity of the election process. The American Civil Liberties Union of Arkansas, which sued the state on behalf of four voters in the other voter ID case before Fox, said it was confident the law would eventually be found unconstitutional.
"This law needs to be struck down and not standing between our voters and the ballot box," said Holly Dickson, ACLU of Arkansas' legal director. "We intend to fight this as long and as hard as we have to."
Under previous law in Arkansas, election workers were required to ask for photo ID but voters didn't have to show it to cast a ballot. Under the new law, voters who don't show photo identification can cast provisional ballots. Those ballots are counted only if voters provide ID to county election officials before noon on the Monday after an election, sign an affidavit stating they are indigent or have a religious objection to being photographed.
Arkansas' law took effect Jan. 1 and had been used in some local elections this year. This month's primary is the first statewide test of the new law.
The case had initially focused on rules for absentee ballots under the voter ID law. The Pulaski County Election Commission sued the state Board of Election Commissioners for adopting a rule that gives absentee voters additional time to show proof of ID. The rule allows voters who did not submit required identification with their absentee ballot to turn in the documents for their vote to be counted by noon Monday following an election. It mirrors an identical "cure period" the law gives to voters who fail to show identification at the polls.
Justices ruled Wednesday that the state panel did not have the authority to grant the additional time to absentee voters, since it wasn't specifically addressed in the law.
"The General Assembly clearly knew how to provide a remedy to absentee voters," the court said in Wednesday's ruling. "Therefore, had the Legislature intended to extend the same remedy to absentee voters, it could have so expressly provided; yet, it did not."
Notice about comments:
The Post and Courier is pleased to offer readers the enhanced ability to comment on stories. Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere in the site or in the newspaper. We ask that you refrain from profanity, hate speech, personal comments and remarks that are off point.