Washington, DC – Today, the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus (CAPAC) expressed disappointment with the U.S. Supreme Court’s 6-3 decision to uphold an Indiana law requiring voters to show government-issued photo identification before they can vote. The decision involved two consolidated cases, Crawford v. Marion County Election Board and Indiana Democratic Party v. Rokita. 

“Voter identification laws have a discriminatory impact on minority communities, new American voters, the poor, elderly, and those with disabilities,” said Rep. Mike Honda (D-CA), Chair of CAPAC. “Placed into proper historical context, the financial costs involved in obtaining proper documents needed to get a government-issued ID, along with transportation costs and time taken off from work, amount to a modern-day poll tax. In this day and age, I am disappointed that there are still those who are working harder to prevent voters from exercising their democratic right than helping to ensure that eligible voter can participate.”

“The Court’s decision would essentially disenfranchise many minority and elderly voters. It is widely known that this will have a disparate impact on low income and elderly voters who may not be able to easily obtain identification,” said Rep. Robert C. “Bobby” Scott, Chair of CAPAC’s Civil Rights Task Force and a senior member of the House Judiciary Committee.

A study by Project Vote noted that Asian American voters in states that required a form of ID were 8.5% less likely to vote compared to Asian American voters in states without voter identification requirements. Research from the Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund (AALDEF) shows that poll workers oftentimes improperly demand identification from Asian American and Pacific Islander voters, particularly language minority voters, even when not required by law.

“With respect to the Asian Pacific Islander American community, demands for identification usually stem from perceptions that the voter does not appear to be an American citizen, perceptions that are based on xenophobia and discrimination,” said Honda. “This research gives us some insight into the nature of voter identification laws. I am disappointed in the Court's decision, and believe it struck the wrong balance, particularly as there was no proof that voter fraud is a significant problem, and as data exists showing a disparate impact on vulnerable populations."