Preview:

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANTS
William R. Groth Fillenwarth Dennerline Groth & Towe, LLP Indianapolis, Indiana Karen Celestino-Horseman Thomas N. Austin Bruce G. Jones Austin & Jones, P.C. Indianapolis, Indiana

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE
Gregory F. Zoeller Attorney General of Indiana Thomas M. Fisher Solicitor General Heather L. Hagan Deputy Attorney General Ashley E. Tatman Deputy Attorney General Indianapolis, Indiana

ATTORNEYS FOR AMICI CURIAE
[see attachment]

Jun 30 2010, 8:30 am

FILED
of the supreme court, court of appeals and tax court

CLERK

______________________________________________________________________________

Indiana Supreme Court
_________________________________ No. 49S02-1001-CV-50 _________________________________ LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF INDIANA, INC., AND LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF INDIANAPOLIS, INC., v. TODD ROKITA, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS INDIANA SECRETARY OF STATE, Appellee (Defendant below). _________________________________ Appeal from the Marion Superior Court, No. 49D13-0806-PL-27627 The Honorable S.K. Reid, Judge _________________________________ On Transfer from the Indiana Court of Appeals, No. 49A02-0901-CV-40 _________________________________ June 30, 2010 Dickson, Justice.

In the

Appellants (Plaintiffs below),

The sole plaintiffs in this case, the Indiana State and Indianapolis chapters of the League of Women Voters, brought this action seeking a declaratory judgment that the Indiana Voter ID Law violates Article 2, Section 2, and Article 1, Section 23 of the Indiana Constitution. The trial court granted the defen-

dant's motion to dismiss, concluding that the Voter ID Law did not violate either constitutional provision. The Court of Appeals reversed. League of Women Voters of Ind., Inc. v. Rokita, 915 N.E.2d 151 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009). We granted transfer, thereby automatically vacating the opinion of the Court of Appeals and accepting jurisdiction over the appeal, pursuant to Indiana Appellate Rule 58(A). Determining that this case presents only facial challenges to the constitutionality of the Voter ID Law, we now affirm the trial court's dismissal of the complaint, but without prejudice to future as-applied challenges by any voter unlawfully prevented from exercising the right to vote.

The relief the plaintiffs seek is a declaration that it was beyond the power of the legislature to require any voters to identify themselves at the polls using a photo ID.1 Voters have long been required to identify themselves at the polls by announcing and signing their names. Neither of the constitutional provisions the plaintiffs invoke prevents the legislature from promulgating a new way for voters to identify themselves. It is within the power of the legislature to require voters to identify themselves at the polls using a photo ID. The plaintiffs' claim for relief cannot be granted and dismissal was appropriate. No individual voter has alleged that the Voter ID Law has prevented him or her from voting or inhibited his or her ability to vote in any way.2 Our decision today does not prevent any such voter from challenging the Law in the future.

In 2005, an enactment of the Indiana General Assembly, Public Law 109-2005, referred to by the parties as the Indiana Voter ID Law, made several modifications to Indiana's election and motor vehicle laws. This Law was challenged in federal court where the plaintiffs claimed that it violated the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution as well as 42 U.S.C.

Download League of Women Voters, et al. v. Todd Rokita.pdf

Indiana Law