COLUMBIA, Mo. (AP) — A trial is set to begin on Friday for a lawsuit challenging Missouri’s new photo identification requirement for voters. The law, passed by the state’s GOP-led Legislature last year, has faced widespread criticism from voting rights groups, who argue that it poses unconstitutional barriers to voting. Here’s a closer look at the function of the law and the arguments presented by both sides.
The Missouri law mandates that voters show a government-issued photo ID in order to cast a regular ballot. Proponents of the law argue that it helps prevent voter fraud and ensures the integrity of the election process. However, critics claim that the requirement disproportionately affects certain groups of voters, making it more difficult for them to exercise their right to vote.
People without a government-issued photo ID are allowed to cast provisional ballots, which can be counted if they return later with a photo ID or if election officials verify their signatures. The law also requires the state to provide a free photo identification card to those who lack one.
Last year, the Missouri League of Women Voters, NAACP, and two voters filed a lawsuit to challenge the law, arguing that it creates undue burdens for some voters. The case was initially dismissed by Cole County Presiding Judge Jon Beetem, who found that the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate a specific injury or legally protectable interest in challenging the photo ID requirement. However, the League of Women Voters and NAACP have since added another voter to the lawsuit and requested that Beetem reconsider his ruling.
The newest plaintiff in the case is John O’Connor, a 90-year-old resident of Columbia, Missouri, who has poor vision and requires assistance with walking. O’Connor’s lawyers argue that he faced difficulties obtaining the required ID due to an expired passport and driver’s license, which are not acceptable forms of identification under state law. They contend that even when voters manage to obtain the necessary documentation, challenges such as lack of transportation or disability can still prevent them from accessing a DMV or other government agencies to obtain a photo ID.
On the other side, Republican Attorney General Andrew Bailey’s office is defending the law, asserting that no eligible voter has been turned away at the polls because of the photo ID requirement. The state lawyers argue that Missouri provides free non-driver’s licenses and birth certificates to those who need them for voting purposes.
Missouri is not alone in implementing voter ID requirements. According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, 36 states request or require identification to vote, with at least 20 of them asking for a photo ID. Other Republican-led states have followed suit, responding to concerns among conservative voters about election fraud and accuracy. Critics, however, argue that such requirements could disenfranchise eligible voters and are unnecessary.
As the trial begins, voting rights advocates and opponents of the Missouri law will closely watch the proceedings. The outcome of the case could have implications not only for Missouri but also for other states with similar voter ID requirements.
