Nos. 06-2218 & 06-2317 INTHE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTHCIRCUIT WILLLAMCRAWFORD, UNITED SENIOR ACTION OF INDIANA,INDIANAPOLIS RESOURCE CENTERFOR INDEPENDENTLIVING, et al., Plain tiffs -Appellan ts, v. TODDROKITA, in hs official capacity as In&ana Secretary of State, J. BRADLEYKING, in his official capacity as co-&rector of In&ana Election Division, KRISTIROBERTSON, in her official capacity as co-director of Indiana Election Division, et al., Defen dants -Appellees. INDIANADEMOCRATIC PARTY and M~ARIoNCOUNTY DEMOCRATICCENTRAL COMMITTEE, Plain tifis -Appellan ts, v. TODDROKITA, in hs official capacity as Indiana Secretary of State, J. BRADLEYKING, in hs official capacity as co-director of In&ana Election Division, KRISTIROBERTSON, in her official capacity as co-director of Indiana Election Division, et al., Defendants -Appellees. APPEALFROM THE UNITEDSTATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERNDISTRICT OF INDIANA CASENO. 1:05-CV-0634-SEB-VSS THE HONORABLESARAH EVANS BARKER BRIEFOF &CI Cmm ERICA AN CENTERFOR VOTINGRIGHTS LEGISLATIVE FUND AND VINCENTI. PEREZ IN SUPPORTOF APPELLEESAND SUPPORTINGAFFIRMANCE Mark F. (Thor) Hearne, I1 Reginald J. Brown Natio~alCounsel, ACVR Daniel Levin LATHROP& GAGE L.C. Todd Zubler 10 South Broadway, 13th Floor David S. Wolf Saint Louis, Missouri 63102 WILMERCUTLER PICKERING (314) 613-2522 mEAND DORRLLP 1875 Pennsylvania Avenue, N. W. Washington, D.C. 20006 (202) 663-6000 RULE 26.1 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Amicus curiae American Center for Voting Rights Legislative Fund ("ACVR") is a nonstock corporation operating under section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code. ACVR has no parent corporation, and because it has no stock, no publicly held company owns 10% or more of its stock. The law firms whose partners or associates have appeared for ACVR and amicus curiae Vincent I. Perez in this case (including proceedings in the district court) or are expected to appear in this Court are Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP and Lathrop & Gage L.C. Todd Zubler Attorney for Amici Curiae American Center for Voting Righ ts Legisla tive Fund and Vincent I, Perez TABLE OF CONTENTS RULE 26.1 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT ............................................... i ... TABLE OF AUTHORITIES .................................................................. .in INTERESTS OF THE AMICI ................................................................. 1 SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT ................................................................. 2 ARGUMENT ........................................................................................... 5 Photo ID Laws Are Reasonable, Nondiscriminatory Efforts To Prevent Fraud and Increase Voter Confidence ............................ 5 A. Photo ID Laws Support Important Government Interests .................................................................................... 7 13. Photo ID Provisions Are a Reasonable Response to Voter Fraud and Impose at Most a Minor Burden on the Right To Vote .................................................. 22 C. Photo ID Rules Are Nondiscriminatory ................................. 30 CONCLUSION ...................................................................................... 33 CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE TBLE OF AUTHORITIES CASES BuckIey v. Valeo. 424 U.S. 1 (1976) ........................................................ 14 hdickv . Takushi. 504 U.S. 428 (1992)........................................... 3. 5-6 Clingman v. Beaver. 544 U.S. 581 (2005)......................................... 3, 5,6 Exparte Yarbrough. 110 U.S. 651 (1884).............................................. 7-8 Federal Election Commission v. National Rig6 t to Work Committee. 459 U.S. 197 (1982) ....................................................... 13, 14 First National Bank of Boston v. Bellotti, 435 U.S. 765 (1978)............... 7 Gonzalez v. Arizona. No . CV 06*1268.PHX.ROS7 2006 WL 1707956 (D . Ariz . June 19. 2006) .................................. 21 Griffin v. Roupas. 385 F.3d 1128 (7th Cir. 2004)~cert . denied, 544 U.S. 923 (2005) ................................................................... 8. 30 McConnell v. Federal Election Commission. 540 U .S . 9 3 (2003) .......... 14 McDonald v. Board of Hection Commissioners. 394 U.S. 802 (1969)................................................................................................. 15. 30 Munro v. Socialist Workers Party, 479 U .S . 189 (1986) ......................... 13 Pabey v. Pastrick. 816 N.E.2d 1138 (Ind. 2004) ..................................... 22 Reynolds v. Sims. 377 U.S. 533 (1964) ............................................ 7.8. 20 Storer v. Brown. 415 U.S. 724 (1974) ....................................................... 2 Timmons v. Twin CjtiesArea Newparty, 520 U.S. 351 (1997)......... 6. 13 Williamson v. Lee Optical of Oklahoma. Inc.. 348 U.S. 483 (1955) ....... 15 STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE IIVILATERWS 152 Cong. Rec . S5050-62 (daily ed. May 24. 2006) ................................. 21 H.R. Rep . No . 105-416 (1998) .................................................................. 21 Fla . Stat. 101.043 ................................................................................. 24 Ga . Code Ann . 21-2-417(a) ................................................................... 24 Hawaii Rev . Stat. § 11-136 ..................................................................... 24 Ind. Code § 3-6-7-1.................................................................................. 18 Ind . Code § 3.10.1.7.2(3) ........................................................................ 28 Ind. Code § 3.11.7.5.1 ........................................................................ 28, 29 Ind . Code § 3.11.7.5.2.5 ........................................................................... 28 Ind. Code § 3.11.8.10.5 ........................................................................... 18 Ind. Code § 3-11-8-19............................................................................... 22 Ind. Code § 3-11.8.25.1(e) ........................................................................ 28 Ind. Code 3.11.10.1.2 ............................................................................ 28 Ind. Code 8 3-11-10-24(a)........................................................................ 28 Ind. Code § 9-24-16-10............................................................................. 28 La . Rev . Stat. Ann . 18:562(A)(2) ......................................................... 24 Mo . Rev . Stat. 115.427..................................................................... 24-25 iv REAL ID Act of 2005. Pub . L . No . 109.13. 119 Stat. 302 (2005) ............ 28 5 201(3) ........................................................................................... 28 § 202(a)(l) ...................................................................................... 27 § 202(c) ........................................................................................... 27 § 202(d) ........................................................................................... 27 § 202(d)(l) ...................................................................................... 27 42 U.S.C. § 15484 .................................................................................... 24 S.D. Codified Laws § 12.18.6.1 ............................................................... 25 REGULATION 140 Ind. Admin . Code 7-4-1to -3 ........................................................... 20 MISCELLANEOUS American Center For Voting Rights. Vote Fraud, Intimidation & Suppression in the 2004 Presidential Election (Aug. 2005) ................... 9 American Center for Voting Rights. Press Release. ACVR Legislative Fund Appla uds NBC/WSJ Poll Finding 80% Support for Photo ID Requirement (April 30. 2006) ................................................................ 23 American Center for Voting Rights. Press Release. Missourians Strongly Favor ID Plan (March 23. 2006) ............................................ 23 American Center for Voting Rights. Press Release. Pennsylvanians Support IZ)Requirement at the Polls (Jan. 30. 2006) ...................................................................................................... 23 Amy Sherman. Double .Voters' Names Going to Prosecutors. Miami Herald. Nov . 14. 2004 ............................................................................ 11 Brief and Appendix for Michigan Republican Party as Amicus Curiae, In re Request for Advisory Opinion Regarding ConstitutionalityofZ005P.A. 71, No. 130589 (Mich. filed July 19, 2006) ..................................................................................................... 10 Commission on Federal Election Reform, Building Confidence in US. Elections (Sept. 2005) .......................................................... 4, 8, 9, 28 Dan McKay, Voter Picture ID Has Mde Support, Albuquerque Journal, Aug. 24, 2005 ................................................ 25, 26 David Decamp, Double Voting Being Investigated, Fla. Times- Union, Jan. 25, 2005 .............................................................................. 11 Erik Siemers, A CLU Sues Clerk Over City's New Voter ID Rule, Albuquerque Tribune, Oct. 28, 2005 ....................................................... 25 Geoff Dougherty, Dead Voters on Rolls, Other Glitches Found in 6 Key States, Chi. Tribune, Dec. 4, 2004 ................................................... 10 Greg J. Borowski,