On Monday, in Crawford v. Marion County Election Board, the Supreme Court upheld the Indiana law requiring voters to have a government issued photo identification card in order to vote. Suit was brought by opponents of the law who claimed that the requirement to have a photo identification card created a substantial barrier for voters have government issued photo identification.
In the 6-3 decision, the Court held the burdens associated with the voter identification requirement did not amount 
to a constitutional violation. Justice Stevens writing for the majority noted, “[o]n the basis of the record that has been made in this litigation, we cannot conclude that the statute imposes excessively burdensome requirements on any class of voters.”
Writing for the dissent, Justice Souter compared the requirement to the poll tax overturned in 1966. “If this court’s decision in Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections stands for anything, it is that being poor has nothing to do with being qualified to vote. . . The calculation revealed in the Indiana statute crosses the line when it targets the poor and the weak.”
The majority led by Stevens rejected this argument, commenting, “[t]he inconvenience of making a trip to the Bureau of Motor Vehicles, gathering the required documents, and posing for a photograph surely does not qualify as a substantial burden on the right to vote, or even represent a significant increase over the usual burdens of voting.”
Held: The voter photo identification requirement did not violate the Constitution.
Plurality Opinion: Stevens, Roberts, Kennedy. Concurring: Scalia, Thomas, and Alito.
Dissent: Breyer, Souter, Ginsburg
. Writing for the plurality in Baze v. Rees, Chief Justice Roberts stated merely “showing a slightly or marginally safe alternative” was not enough to successfully challenge the method of execution. Instead, there must be proof that the alternate method prevents a “substantial risk of serious harm”
