In Count US IN v. Morales, the Seventh Circuit stayed a district court injunction that would have blocked enforcement of Indiana’s Senate Bill 10 during the state’s ongoing primary election.
For roughly two decades, Indiana allowed student IDs from state-run universities to satisfy its proof-of-identification requirement if they met the same statutory criteria applicable to other voting IDs. Senate Bill 10 removed that option by excluding documents issued by educational institutions from acceptable voter identification.
The plaintiffs argued that Senate Bill 10 burdens young voters and violates the Twenty-Sixth Amendment. The district court blocked enforcement after early voting had begun, but the Seventh Circuit stayed that order without reaching the merits. Applying Purcell, the court held that changing voter eligibility rules mid-election created a serious risk of disruption. Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita and his team fought hard to get this decision to protect ballot integrity and public confidence.
The case highlights a recurring tension in election law: how courts should address alleged constitutional violations when judicial intervention would change election rules after voting has already begun.
First and Fourteenth attorneys Andrew Nussbaum, Chris Murray, and James Compton are co-counsel with the Indiana Attorney General’s Office.
Read Opinion Here: Count US IN v. Morales