Brunner suffers another legal defeat

Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner doesn't have a very strong track record in court.  She lost another major case today when the U.S. Supreme Court upheld Indiana's voter identification law.  Brunner filed a friend of the court brief arguing against the ID requirements.

Ohio Republican Party Deputy Chairman Kevin DeWine today in response to the court's ruling:

"Ohio's voter identification requirements were designed to prevent fraud and promote voter confidence, and the high court's ruling vindicates those reforms.  Democrats are now on the wrong side of the law on this issue.  Ironically, their accusations of disenfranchisement were never matched with a single person who couldn't vote because of these requirements.  This ruling also defies the partisan agenda of Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner, who declared Ohio's voter identification law 'a bad idea' and a 'disgrace' to our state.  That opinion is perhaps better applied to her reckless management of our elections system."

Brunner Called Ohio's Voter ID Requirements "A Bad Idea" And A "Disgrace."
"The voter identification requirements of Sub. H. B. 3 are a bad idea-they are a 'solution' that creates a problem and will put our state into further disgrace as to how we run our elections. I urge you to defeat this provision." (Remarks of Jennifer Brunner Before Ohio Senate Rules Committee - 12/7/05, www.caseohio.org, Accessed 4/28/08)

Brunner Filed An Amicus Brief In This Case. 
"Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner, a Democrat, is among current and former state chief elections officers who filed a friend of the court brief opposing the Indiana law. Brunner, like many Democrats who believe voter-ID laws tend to bar more of their backers than Republicans from polling places, says she doesn't want Ohio's law to be made more stringent." (Jonathan Riskind, "Supreme Court Finding Indiana's Voter ID Law Is A Trip Into Wonderment," Columbus Dispatch, 1/13/08)

The Supreme Court Declared Voter ID Requirements "Amply Justified By The Valid Interest In Protecting 'The Integrity And Reliability Of The Electoral Process.'" 
"The law 'is amply justified by the valid interest in protecting "the integrity and reliability of the electoral process,"' Justice John Paul Stevens said in an opinion that was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Anthony Kennedy.  Justices Samuel Alito, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas also agreed with the outcome, but wrote separately." (Mark Sherman, "Supreme Court Upholds Photo ID Law For Voters In Indiana," Associated Press, 4/28/08)