Pennsylvania Voter I.D. Law Disproportionately Impacts Women as Election Draws Near

Molly Cohen, WLP Intern

When Pennsylvania passed a law earlier this year imposing a voter ID requirement on voting in every election and narrowing the list of acceptable forms of ID, critics quickly pointed out that the law targets specific populations. Low-income voters, racial minorities, and elderly voters are less likely to possess the necessary photo ID. For many, obtaining proper identification entails a descent into the oft unnavigable maze of state bureaucracies. Additionally, despite Governor Corbett’s promise that there would be no financial cost to this process, those who do not have a raised-seal copy of their birth certificate must pay ten dollars to obtain one. Without this, they cannot apply for a photo ID if they have never had PennDOT issued ID before. The cost and effort of this process may dissuade otherwise eligible voters from participating in the coming election.

The ACLU of Pennsylvania, the Public Interest Law Center of Philadelphia (PILCOP), the Advancement Project, and the law firm of Arnold & Porter, LLP, filed a lawsuit on behalf of ten Pennsylvania residents who will be unable to cast their votes this November because of the new regulations, alleging that the law creates an “undue burden” on voters without photo identification and disproportionately affects the poor.

However, in addition to targeting the aforementioned marginalized groups, voter rights advocates warn that this issue significantly impacts women across the socioeconomic spectrum. As we explained in an earlier article, women commonly change their names and their addresses to marry or divorce. According to Faye Anderson, the chief spokesperson of a voter information network called the Cost of Freedom Project, approximately 34% of eligible female voters do not possess citizenship documents that bear their current name. Anyone who does not take steps to correct a mismatched last name or outdated address may be unpleasantly surprised to find that she cannot cast a ballot at the polls.

The validity of the Voter ID law is, at best, questionable. Proponents of the legislation peddled it as the cure for voter fraud, yet there is no evidence that any such problem actually exists. While Governor Corbett, who signed the bill, initially claimed that the law would only impact 1% of Pennsylvanians, a new study places the number closer to 9% statewide. In Philadelphia County, 15.6% of active voters do not possess PennDOT ID and may be ineligible to vote. These statistics have been proffered as evidence that the law, which passed along strict party lines, was designed to suppress liberal votes and ensure the GOP retains political primacy in the state. Mike Turzai, the State House Majority Leader,  reinforced these concerns when he spoke at a recent Republican State Committee meeting. He named the law as one of the party’s accomplishments for the year: “Voter ID, which is gonna allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania, done.”

A hearing slated for July 25^th in the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court in Applewhite et al. v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, et al. will determine whether the law will be in effect this November.

Those who oppose the Voter ID Law have organized several protests and events for the week leading up to the hearing in order to increase media attention and public pressure. A partial schedule is included below.

Saturday 7/21:
PA Voter ID Coalition Operations Center Open House from 11 am to 2 pm at 310 West Chelten Avenue in Philadelphia

Tuesday 7/24:
NAACP Rally for Justice at 1 pm at the State Capitol (3^rd Street & State Street) in Harrisburg

Wednesday 7/25:
Hearing in Commonwealth Court to stop the Voter ID Law at 10 am in Courtroom 3002 at the Pennsylvania Judicial Center (601 Commonwealth Avenue in Harrisburg). This is a public hearing, and supporters of the lawsuit are encouraged to attend.

There will also be protests across the state on the same day.

Philadelphia: 11 am – Thomas Paine Plaza (Broad Street & JFK Blvd)

Lehigh Valley: 12 pm – Lehigh County Government Center (7^th Street & Hamilton Street, Allentown)

Pittsburgh: 1 pm – Freedom Corner (Crawford Street & Centre Avenue)

Decades after Reforms Erased Sexual Assault Myths from the Letter of the Law, Pennsylvania’s Criminal Justice System Remains Infected

In the early morning hours in a college dorm room, three young men took turns physically restraining and vaginally, anally, and orally penetrating an eighteen-year-old woman student without her consent.  The victim had allowed the three men — who were friends of a friend — to hang out in her room after a party in the hall had ended, but said “no” when one tried to kiss her and then tried to move away when he made further sexual advances.  Afraid, embarrassed, and in shock, she was unable to take any further action to protect herself.  The district attorney brought charges against the men, and after a three day trial, the jury convicted the three men of sexual assault, indecent assault, and false imprisonment.  The trial court affirmed the sexual assault and indecent assault convictions when it denied the defendants’ motion for a new trial.  On appeal, however, the Pennsylvania Superior Court overturned these convictions.  The case, Commonwealth v. Claybrook, is now on appeal before the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.

In an Amicus (“friend of the court”) brief filed on March 2, 2012 on behalf of the Women’s Law Project (WLP) and forty-two Pennsylvania and national organizations dedicated to justice for victims of sexual assault, amici argue that the Superior Court overturned these convictions in reliance on sexual assault myths, including the myths that primarily strangers perpetrate sexual assault and that social interaction, absence of physical resistance, absence of severe physical injuries, and certain post-assault victim behaviors imply consent.  These myths have been discredited by social science research and eliminated by the Pennsylvania General Assembly.

Beginning in the early 1970s, the Pennsylvania General Assembly dramatically changed Pennsylvania’s sex offense laws.  For example, the legislature eliminated the requirements of resistance, corroboration, and prompt complaint so that a victim’s lack of active resistance, lack of physical injuries, or delay in reporting the crime would not bar prosecution.  In 1995, the legislature revamped Pennsylvania’s sex offense laws again.  Recognizing the complexity of sexual assault, particularly when the parties know each other, the legislature adopted a broader definition of forcible compulsion, eliminated differential treatment of spousal rape, and recognized the crime of “sexual assault,” defined as sexual penetration without consent.  With these changes, as legislative history shows and as the amicus brief lays out, the legislature eliminated several sexual assault myths from the law.

Social science research supports the elimination of these myths.  Most rapes are committed by someone the victim knows; rape often results in few, if any, physical injuries apart from the rape itself; and many victims do not physically resist their attackers for a variety of reasons, including fear of serious injury or death and trauma that causes some victims to become immobilized.  Furthermore, research shows that there is a wide range of reactions and behaviors that victims exhibit during and in the aftermath of sexual assault, and it is erroneous to assume that a victim should behave in any particular way.

The perpetuation of myths adopted by the Superior Court fuels distrust in the criminal justice system and contributes to the low reporting of sex offenses.  The vast majority of sexual assault victims do not report their sexual assault to police.  A recent discussion on twitter with the hashtag #ididnotreport illustrates how lack of confidence in the justice system silences victims of sexual assault and harassment.  One tweet explains, “[I did not report] because I have no faith in our justice system where so few rapists are jailed + victims are treated like perpetrators.”

To stop sexual assault and create a just society where perpetrators of sexual violence are punished for their crimes, the justice system must rid itself of the types of myths on which the Superior Court relied in Commonwealth v. Claybrook.

For more information on WLP’s work related to violence against women, click here and stay tuned for WLP’s forthcoming report, Through the Lens of Equality: Gender Bias, Health, and a New Vision for Pennsylvania’s Women, which details the pernicious impact of sexual assault and harassment on women’s health.