Really happy to see this:(pdf)
COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
Plaintiffs Ruthelle Frank, Carl Ellis, Justin Luft, Dartric Davis, Barbara Oden, Sandra Jashinski, Pamela Dukes, Anthony Sharp, Anthony Judd, Anna Shea, Matthew Dearing, Max Kligman, Samantha Meszaros, Steve Kvasnicka,
Sarah Lahti, Domonique Whitehurst by his mother and next friend Sabrena Putnam, and Edward Hogan (collectively, “Plaintiffs”), who are eligible Wisconsin voters, bring this action to protect their right to vote under the United States Constitution and federal law.NATURE OF THE ACTION
1. This action seeks declaratory and injunctive relief against Wisconsin state officials’ enforcement of 2011 Wisconsin Act 23 (the “photo ID law”), which requires voters in Wisconsin to present photo identification in order to cast their votes either in person at a polling place or by absentee ballot. This requirement will be effective as of Wisconsin’s spring primary on February 21, 2012.
2. This lawsuit seeks a declaratory judgment that the photo ID law is unconstitutional as applied to certain classes of eligible Wisconsin voters, and to enjoin its enforcement with respect to these classes. The photo ID law imposes a severe and undue burden on the fundamental right to vote under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution;
violates the Twenty-Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution as an unconstitutional poll tax; and violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment in arbitrarily refusing to accept certain identification documents.
bring this action to protect their right to vote under the United States Constitution and federal law
There’s been so much bullshit heaped on and around the voting process from conservatives and media it’s a real pleasure to read something so clear and plain.
This plaintiff’s dilemma is interesting:
Plaintiff Samantha Meszaros is an 18-year-old Caucasian freshman at Carthage College, an accredited four-year private college in Kenosha, Wisconsin, and an eligible voter. She lacks all the accepted forms of photo ID under the photo ID law, including a compliant student ID card. She currently holds an unexpired driver’s license from the State of Illinois which she does not want to surrender. Ms. Meszaros intends to vote in Wisconsin next year and will vote for the first time in 2012.
And here’s the Wisconsin law:
An individual who resides in Wisconsin and wishes to obtain a free Wisconsin ID card for voting purposes must surrender any valid out-of-state driver’s license he/she possesses. Wis. Stat. § 343.50(1)(b), as amended by 2011 Wis. Act 23 § 130.
A person with a driver’s license from another state who wishes to obtain a Wisconsin driver’s license must pay a fee. Wis. Stat. § 343.21.
There is no fee waiver for obtaining a driver’s license even if that license will constitute the individual’s sole form of accepted photo ID for voting purposes.
They’re so sloppy. It’s almost like they want courts to review a poll tax. They move closer and closer to imposing a poll tax with each new voter suppression law.
h/t to the always-excellent-on-voting-rights-issues, Talking Points Memo
For comparison, here’s the Indiana SCOTUS decision that paved the way for all these increasingly aggressive voter suppression tactics.