Photo

Reuters Photojournalism

Our day's top images, in-depth photo essays and offbeat slices of life. See the best of Reuters photography.  See more | Photo caption 

Photo

Devastated by tornado

A huge tornado tears through the Oklahoma City suburb of Moore, killing dozens.  Slideshow 

Photo

Nuclear tsunami wall

Safety upgrades designed to prevent a repeat of the Fukushima disaster.  Slideshow 

Sponsored Links

South Carolina sues Obama administration over voter ID law

Related Topics

CHARLESTON, South Carolina | Tue Feb 7, 2012 7:11pm EST

CHARLESTON, South Carolina (Reuters) - South Carolina's attorney general sued President Barack Obama's administration on Tuesday over the federal government's rejection of the state's new voter identification law, arguing it would not disenfranchise any potential voters.

The Obama administration in December blocked South Carolina's law, signed by Republican Governor Nikki Haley in May, because of concerns it would hurt the ability of members of minority groups to cast ballots.

The law requires voters to show either a driver's license, passport or military identification along with a voter registration card at the polls. But a provision also allows them to vote without a photo ID if they sign an affidavit.

"Nothing in this law prevents anyone from voting if they cannot immediately show a valid photo identification," South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson said in a statement.

"The Department of Justice has denied citizens in South Carolina protection of a law that the U.S. Supreme Court upheld in Indiana, and the DOJ itself pre-cleared for Georgia," he said.

South Carolina is one of six Republican-led states that tightened their laws last year to require a photo ID. Two other Republican-led states have similar laws in place, while 23 more states require voters to produce some form of identification.

Under the South Carolina law, which supporters say would help prevent fraud, anyone who wants to vote but does not have a photo ID must obtain a new voter registration card that includes a photo. A birth certificate can be used to prove identity.

But the laws have often drawn objections from Democrats, who say they suppress the votes of people more likely to vote Democratic, such as African Americans, the elderly and the young.

The Justice Department said South Carolina's requirement could impede the voting rights of tens of thousands of people, noting that just over a third of the state's registered minority voters did not have a driver's license.

South Carolina is also one of several states that must have clearance from the federal government before changing voting laws because of its past record of using mechanisms such as literacy tests to suppress the black vote.

Wilson filed the lawsuit against the United States and U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

"Like the Indiana law, South Carolina's photo identification law only places upon the voter an affirmative responsibility to obtain an approved photo identification card and to bring it to the polls," the suit said.

The photo ID requirements are a "temporary inconvenience no greater than the inconvenience inherent in voting itself," according to the complaint. A section of the law lets those who have no photo ID vote after signing an affidavit, Wilson said.

The Justice Department declined to comment on the suit.

The American Civil Liberties Union said on Tuesday it would intervene in the lawsuit on behalf of the federal government.

"The Department of Justice followed the letter and the spirit of the law when it rejected South Carolina's discriminatory voter ID law," Nancy Abudu, senior staff attorney with the ACLU's Voting Rights Project, said in a statement.

"Instead of fighting for this law in court, South Carolina and other states should focus on expanding the right to vote."

(Additional reporting by Jeremy Pelofsky; Editing by Colleen Jenkins and Cynthia Johnston)

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (13)
NewsDebbie wrote:
I’m getting pretty tired of the Southern States still fighting the Civil War, Voting Rights Acts, and what happens in people’s bedrooms. Move from 1864, 1964, to 2012 for goodness sake. It’s getting oh so old.

Feb 07, 2012 8:01pm EST  --  Report as abuse
belljj wrote:
Why is it an undue burden to have to prove who you are before you can vote? It’s no more than I have to do when I cash a check. How else do you verify you are in the right district polling place to vote for your local congress representatives?

Feb 07, 2012 8:26pm EST  --  Report as abuse
samson362 wrote:
Yes, actually making sure the voters are legally able to vote is a huge problem. Get over it people. People should really get into the 21st century and finally figure out that voter fraud has been happening for a very long time. I guess only fools try to fix that. Some people are so damn ignorant.

Feb 07, 2012 8:28pm EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.