Idaho’s Efforts to Curtail the Youth Vote in the 2024 Election, Part I
October 29, 2024
By: Katherine von Schaumburg
The youth vote has become a central component of American politics in the last decade. Both the 2022 Midterm Election and the 2020 General Election saw a historic rise in the amount of young people (ages 18-29) voting. Recently, Idaho passed two laws, House Bill 124 and House Bill 340, which will have a direct impact on youth voter registration and participation. This blog post will be the first part in a two-part series: Part I examines the laws and the legal challenges to the laws and Part II will explore the actual impact of voter identification laws on youth voters, both in Idaho and across the country.
The Laws
Section 34-1113 of the Idaho Code requires all voters to show photo identification at the polls before voting. This includes an Idaho driver’s license, a passport, a tribal identification card, and a license to carry a concealed weapon. While this list previously included student identification cards, House Bill 124 (“H.B. 124”), introduced in February 2023, removed the provision and now requires students to use one of the other acceptable forms of identification. The bill was passed by both houses of the state legislature, signed into law by the governor, and went into effect on January 1, 2024.
The Idaho legislature also passed H.B. 340, which amended Section 34-404 of the Idaho code. It added a proof of identity and residence requirement to register and only allows individuals to use an Idaho driver’s license, a passport, a tribal identification card, and a license to carry a concealed weapon as proof of identity. The bill was passed by both houses of the state legislature, signed into law by the governor, and went into effect on July 1, 2023.
The Lawsuits
In March 2023, after the passage of H.B. 124, Babe Vote and the League of Women Voters of Idaho (“Babe Vote”) and March for Our Lives Idaho (“MFOL Idaho”) filed lawsuits against the Idaho Secretary of State Phil McGrane, challenging both H.B. 124 and H.B. 340 as forms of youth voter suppression. Babe Vote filed their case in state court, while MFOL Idaho filed in federal court. Those cases are discussed in turn:
Babe Vote v. McGrane
In their complaint, Babe Vote argued that the Legislature’s claims that student IDs are a source of voter fraud and restricting their use will ensure election integrity are unfounded, as no evidence supported that fact. Babe Vote claimed that the Legislature’s justifications are insufficient to justify the burdens H.B. 124 and H.B. 340 places on Idaho voters. For these reasons, the law violates the Idaho Constitution’s guarantees of the right to vote, equal protection, and due process.
After Babe Vote filed the complaint, Secretary McGrane filed counterclaims seeking a declaratory judgment that H.B. 124 and 340 did not violate the Idaho or United States Constitutions. He also filed motions for judgment on the pleadings and for summary judgment. Babe Vote filed a motion to dismiss Secretary McGrane’s counter claims and a motion for preliminary injunction.
In October 2023, the Idaho District Court decided a number of important issues. First, they concluded that when balancing constitutional provisions (here: the right of suffrage for the people and the ability of the delegates to determine the qualifications, limitations, and conditions necessary for the exercise of the right), rational basis must be applied. Second, the court found that “[t]he new laws are rationally related to their stated purpose to clarify and create uniformity, by requiring only generally-accepted, authentic and reliable forms of identification as a reasonable condition to exercise the right of suffrage.” Third, the court granted the Secretary’s Motion to Dismiss.
Over a year later, on April 11, 2024, the Supreme Court of Idaho affirmed the District Court’s decision, upholding the motion to dismiss. The court found that the laws were “reasonable exercises of the legislature’s authority to enact conditions on the right of suffrage” under the Idaho Constitution.
While the laws survived the challenge at the state level, there is a chance the laws are struck down on federal grounds.
March for Our Lives Idaho v. McGrane
MFOL Idaho argued that the law violated the Twenty-Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution, because H.B. 124 specifically targeted high school and college students and threatened their political participation. They brought an action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for a declaratory judgment that H.B. 124 violates the constitution and an injunction requiring Defendant to direct election workers to accept student IDs as valid forms of voter identification. Secretary McGrane subsequently filed a motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.
On October 11, 2023, the United States District Court for the District of Idaho denied the motion to dismiss, finding that the plaintiff organizations had adequately alleged standing, that the plaintiffs’ injuries were redressable, and that the claims were ripe for review.
While the outcome of March for Our Lives Idaho v. McGrane is promising for the organizations challenging the laws, it seems unlikely that there will be any concrete action taken before the 2024 General Election. Part II of this post will analyze the impact on voter identification laws on the youth vote in Idaho and across the country.