Liberal Irvine Law Professor Richard L. Hasen, who agrees with the petitioners that voter-ID is facially unconstitutional, believes that this rendered affirmative trial ruling in favor of the respondents, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Thomas W. Corbett in his official capacity as the Governor and Carol Aichele in her official capacity as Secretary of the Commonwealth, to uphold the photo voter-ID requirement as facially valid under the PA Constitution will be sustained by the membership of the PA Commonwealth Supreme Court. I agree with that prediction because facial nullity is a greater standard than as-applied nullity in judicial review by the litigants seeking a suffrage constitutional challenge. Judge Robert Simpson was exercising judicial restraint according Professor Hasen. Various litigation attorneys regard this Republican Judge Robert Simpson who was formerly a Democrat, 60, as a judicial moderate. The Crawford v. Marion County Election Board 553 US 181 (2008) jurisprudence for facial nullity was used in this case. Judge Robert Simpson asserts that an as-applied challenge to Act 18 is sufficiently appropriate for litigants on the constitutional right of suffrage rather than a facial challenge on the right of suffrage. The petitioner failed to satisfy the prerequisites for granted injunctive relief. The 93-year plaintiff Vivian Applewhite condemned this ruling affirming the facial constitutionality of the voter identification law. While the defendants, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, praised this ruling affirming the constitutionality of the voter identification law.

Advancement Project co-director Judith Browne-Dianis said the civil rights groups will take “immediate steps” to appeal the commonwealth court’s decision to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.

“Pennsylvania’s Voter ID law erects an unequal barrier to voting for hundreds of thousands of eligible voters, disproportionately blocking veterans, seniors and people of color from the polls,” Browne-Dianis said in a statement.

Secretary of the Commonwealth Carol Aichele, whose department oversees elections in Pennsylvania, said in a statement after the ruling that the court’s decision “will reinforce the principle of one person, one vote.”

“I am pleased Judge Simpson affirmed the constitutionality of the voter ID law,” Aichele said. “By giving us a reliable way to verify the identity of each voter, the voter ID law will enhance confidence in our elections.”

Liberal Irvine Law Professor Richard L. Hasen, who agrees with the petitioners that voter-ID is facially unconstitutional, believes that this rendered affirmative trial ruling in favor of the respondents, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Thomas W. Corbett in his official capacity as the Governor and Carol Aichele in her official capacity as Secretary of the Commonwealth, to uphold the photo voter-ID requirement as facially valid under the PA Constitution will be sustained by the membership of the PA Commonwealth Supreme Court. I agree with that prediction because facial nullity is a greater standard than as-applied nullity in judicial review by the litigants seeking a suffrage constitutional challenge. Judge Robert Simpson was exercising judicial restraint according Professor Hasen. Various litigation attorneys regard this Republican Judge Robert Simpson who was formerly a Democrat, 60, as a judicial moderate. The Crawford v. Marion County Election Board 553 US 181 (2008) jurisprudence for facial nullity was used in this case. Judge Robert Simpson asserts that an as-applied challenge to Act 18 is sufficiently appropriate for litigants on the constitutional right of suffrage rather than a facial challenge on the right of suffrage. The petitioner failed to satisfy the prerequisites for granted injunctive relief. The 93-year plaintiff Vivian Applewhite condemned this ruling affirming the facial constitutionality of the voter identification law. While the defendants, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, praised this ruling affirming the constitutionality of the voter identification law.

Advancement Project co-director Judith Browne-Dianis said the civil rights groups will take “immediate steps” to appeal the commonwealth court’s decision to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.

“Pennsylvania’s Voter ID law erects an unequal barrier to voting for hundreds of thousands of eligible voters, disproportionately blocking veterans, seniors and people of color from the polls,” Browne-Dianis said in a statement.

Secretary of the Commonwealth Carol Aichele, whose department oversees elections in Pennsylvania, said in a statement after the ruling that the court’s decision “will reinforce the principle of one person, one vote.”

“I am pleased Judge Simpson affirmed the constitutionality of the voter ID law,” Aichele said. “By giving us a reliable way to verify the identity of each voter, the voter ID law will enhance confidence in our elections.”