ACLU Files Lawsuit Challenging Missouri's
Photo ID Voting Law

Law Will Violate the Hancock Amendment of the Missouri Constitution and Disenfranchise Thousands of Missouri Voters

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
July 17, 2006

Kansas City, Mo.– Today the American Civil Liberties Union of Kansas and Western Missouri and the ACLU of Eastern Missouri filed a lawsuit in Cole County Circuit Court, challenging Missouri's new voter identification law. The law requires Missouri's voters to present state-issued photo identification cards at the polls in order to be eligible to vote. According to ACLU officials, the law is unconstitutional because it will place unreasonable financial burdens on the taxpayers of Missouri counties. As a result of these burdens, thousands of Missouri voters will be unable to secure the extensive documentation to qualify for the newly required ID card, and any associated fees will prohibit these same people from meeting the new requirement to vote.

“Our overall concern is that the new law will exclude people who want to vote, who deserve to vote, and are qualified to vote,” said Brett Shirk, the Executive Director of the ACLU for Kansas and Western Missouri. “The Supreme Court has held that a state cannot value one persons' vote over another,” Shirk continued, “and, unfortunately, that is exactly what this law will do.”

Missouri Governor Matt Blunt signed the Photo ID bill into law June 14, 2006, over the objection of Missouri Secretary of State Robin Carnahan. Carnahan's office informed Blunt that if the law was enacted, it would be financially impossible to implement the proposed changes in time to preserve the voting rights of hundreds of thousands of Missouri voters. In a letter to the Governor, Carnahan asked Blunt to call a special session of the state legislature to allocate funds to ensure that voting rights were preserved. Governor Blunt refused Carnahan's request and signed the law.

The ACLU's lawsuit was filed against the State of Missouri and asks for declaratory, injunctive and class action relief. The suit names as plaintiffs Jackson County Missouri, Jackson County Executive Kathryn J. Shields, the City of St. Louis, Missouri, St. Louis Mayor Francis G. Slay, and St. Louis County Executive Charlie A. Dooley.

The lawsuit brings the cause of action pursuant to Article X, Section 23 of the Missouri Constitution to enforce Sections 16-22 of Article X, commonly referred to as the “Hancock Amendment.” The Hancock Amendment provides that “the state is prohibited from requiring any new or expanded activities by counties and other political subdivisions without full state financing.” The Amendment also provides that “a new activity or service … shall not be required by the General Assembly or any state agency of counties or other political subdivisions, unless a state appropriation is made and dispersed to pay the county or other political subdivision for any increased cost.”

The lawsuit states that Missouri's Photo ID law will require Jackson County and the city of St. Louis to provide activities, services and expenditures of general revenue funds that are not justified according to the law, and an expenditure of taxpayer funds not justified according to law.

“If the law is unenforceable in some counties, but not in others, the voter identification standards will be lower in those counties. This means that some citizens will be allowed to vote while other similarly situated citizens are forced to file provisional ballots that may not be counted. Many voters will not be allowed to vote at all,” said Shirk.

“This is not a partisan lawsuit,” said Shirk. “We are simply trying to preserve the voting rights of Missouri citizens. It is regrettable that a lawsuit had to be filed, but the right to vote is an essential ingredient to preserving a democratically elected government in our state.”

# # #