On Jan. 17, Commonwealth Court Judge Bernard L. McGinley issued his long-awaited ruling on the challenge to Act 18, Pennsylvania’s photo ID law, in Applewhite v. Commonwealth, 330 MD 2012. McGinley held that Act 18 cannot be applied consistent with its terms and that it violates Article I, Section 5 of the Pennsylvania Constitution. The court permanently enjoined state officials from enforcing the act’s photo identification requirement for voting.
The case is not yet over because the state officials still have the opportunity to file post-trial motions in the Commonwealth Court or to appeal to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. It is therefore early to draw any final conclusions about the case’s meaning or its national impact. But the 300-page opinion, findings of fact and conclusions of law offer a vivid look at the law and its impact on registered voters in Pennsylvania.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
