October Term 2007 · Docket 07-21

Does Indiana's photo ID law violate the right to vote?

the sides that brought the case claim the law burdens voting. the opposing sides say it prevents fraud.

Official caption
Crawford v. Marion County Election Board
Latest argument session
Latest official Court activity
Latest verified event
Argued
Sources analyzed through
Official Transcript

Verified source milestones

  1. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
  2. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.

The arguments, in order

This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.

  1. Argument 1 ·

    What happened at the argument

    the sides that brought the case claim the law burdens fundamental voting rights.

    the opposing sides assert no evidence shows widespread lack of ID.

    the opposing sides argue some identity verification is always required.

    Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details

    Sources used for this argument breakdown

A citizen's guide to the whole case

What this case is about

This case tests Indiana's voter ID law. the sides that brought the case seek to strike it down. the opposing sides defend the statute.

Official sources for this section

How the case got here

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on January 9, 2008.

Official sources for this section

What each side wants

the sides that brought the case want the Court to invalidate the photo ID requirement.

the opposing sides want the Court to uphold the photo ID requirement.

Official sources for this section

What each side says

the sides that brought the case argue the law imposes substantial burdens on voters.

the opposing sides argue the law is necessary to verify voter identity.

Official sources for this section

What the justices asked

Justice Kennedy asked if any association could sue on behalf of voters.

Chief Justice Roberts asked if standing relies on specific party members.

Official sources for this section

Why it matters

The outcome defines the scope of voting rights protections. It sets standards for state election administration rules.

Official sources for this section

What happens next

This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.

Official sources for this section

Official Court provenance

Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page

Title and summary sources

Revision history

  1. Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.

  2. Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.

Download this sanitized case as JSON