Arkansas officials ask court to keep voter ID law in place

Legal Outlook

Arkansas officials asked the state's highest court on Monday to allow them to enforce a voter ID law in the May 22 primary despite a judge blocking the measure and calling it unconstitutional.

Secretary of State Mark Martin asked the Arkansas Supreme Court to put on hold a Pulaski County judge's ruling preventing the state from enforcing the 2017 law requiring voters to show photo identification before casting a ballot. Martin asked the high court for a ruling by noon Friday, noting that early voting for the primary begins May 7.

"Here, the trial court has changed the rules in the middle of the election," Martin's filing said. "An immediate stay is necessary; any further delay will harm the state."

Pulaski County Circuit Judge Alice Gray sided with a Little Rock voter who sued the state and had argued the law enacted last year circumvents a 2014 Arkansas Supreme Court ruling that struck down a previous voter ID measure.

An attorney for the Little Rock voter said he hoped the court would not halt the ruling, noting evidence that nearly 1,000 votes weren't counted in the 2014 primary because of the previous voter ID law that was struck down later that year.

"We want the votes of Arkansans to count and would hope that the Circuit Court's decision would be in effect during the upcoming primary," attorney Jeff Priebe said in an email.

Martin and Attorney General Leslie Rutledge last week appealed Gray's ruling, but the court earlier Monday set a schedule for filing briefs that wouldn't begin until June.

The revived voter ID law would require voters to show photo identification before casting a ballot. It's aimed at addressing an argument by some state Supreme Court justices that the 2013 law didn't receive enough votes in the Legislature to be enacted. The court's majority ruled the law violated the Arkansas Constitution by adding a new requirement to vote.

Related listings

  • NY high court nixes Trump's bid to delay defamation suit

    NY high court nixes Trump's bid to delay defamation suit

    Legal Outlook 06/16/2018

    New York's highest court on Thursday turned down President Donald Trump's latest bid to delay a defamation suit filed by a former "Apprentice" contestant who accused him of unwanted groping and kissing.The ruling by the state Court of Appeals didn't ...

  • Polish court rules against man who wouldn't serve LGBT group

    Polish court rules against man who wouldn't serve LGBT group

    Legal Outlook 06/12/2018

    Poland's Supreme Court has ruled against a businessman who refused to print posters for an LGBT business group because he did not want to "promote" the gay rights movement. The country's top court said it was upholding the ruling of a lower court. Th...

  • Court to consider fraud investigator in NFL concussion case

    Court to consider fraud investigator in NFL concussion case

    Legal Outlook 06/01/2018

    A federal judge in Philadelphia is scheduled to hear arguments in the NFL's request for a special investigator to look into what the league says are fraudulent claims in a $1 billion concussion settlement.The league last month cited an independent st...

Chicago Business Fraud Attorney

Business Fraud can take many forms. In the broadest terms, a fraud occurs when someone intentionally deceives others for personal gain. Many times business fraud is harmful and recovery is necessary. Losing your personal or business’s assets can devastate your entire life. Contact Roth Law Groupto receive help on restoring your business to normalcy before you were victimized with fraud. Business fraud cases can involve multiple people and complicated schemes aimed at deceiving the public, auditors, investigators, or others. Whether you are dealing with corporate fraud or commercial fraud, we can step in and fight back to receive compensation that you deserve.

At Roth Law Group we are devoted to prosecuting and defending the legal rights of individuals and small businesses, as either plaintiff or defendant. Proving fraud can be extremely difficult. To have a successful business fraud case, one must prove that the defendant purposefully set out to defraud the victim. Fraud cases are being investigated more aggressively than ever. With increasing federal regulation and scrutiny of corporate practises, many individuals and businesses find themselves the subject of business fraud investigations.