Former Democratic Attorney General Frank Kelley believed the law "violated the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment, which guarantees the right to vote," the article continues. Therefore, Republicans in the state House in support of the law asked the Supreme Court "for an opinion on the law's constitutionality."
Those in favor of the law, the Republicans on the court, support it for several reasons, one being that they want to eliminate voter fraud. Requiring IDs is a "reasonable, nondiscriminatory restriction designed to preserve the purity of elections and to prevent abuses of the electoral franchise," said Justice Robert Young, Jr.
And Chris Ward, a state representative, said, according to the article, that "requiring photo ID is the 'most effective and simplest way to ensure a clean vote.'" Craig DeRoche, the House Minority Leader, even "likened the ID requirement to showing ID when writing a check or using a debit card."
However, Democrats on the court who oppose the law claim that "the requiring is essentially a poll tax that will hit the poor, elderly, disabled, and minorities hardest and keep voters without IDs away from the polls." They have also stated that "[t]here isn't any evidence that in-person voter fraud exists in Michigan" and that "fraud claims are used to suppress the votes of minorities and the poor," the article continues.
Regarding the poll tax, Republicans disagree. Voters without ID, according to the same article on www.chicagotribune.com, "can swear to their identity instead of paying $10 for a state ID card or $25 for a driver's license."
