RICHMOND, Va. — A 69-year-old black woman who grew up in a small, segregated city wept on the witness stand Monday as she testified about the trouble she had voting in 2014 because she could not comply with Virginia’s voter identification law.
Josephine Okiakpe said she plucked several forms of ID from her purse – birth certificate, Social Security card, voter registration card, even a bank statement – and handed them over to workers at her Woodbridge polling place. The only things she had with her picture on them were her North Carolina driver’s license and an expired Virginia Department of Motor Vehicles ID card.
“They wouldn’t take any of that,” said Okiakpe, who earlier had described attending an all-black public school in Clinton, North Carolina, that got hand-me-down books when the white schools got new ones.
As she haggled with the poll workers, she said some other voters looked at her and snickered.
“I felt very frustrated, very upset,” she said, trying to fight back tears.
Okiakpe was the first witness in the Virginia Democratic Party’s lawsuit challenging the state’s 2013 law requiring voters to show a valid photo ID at the polls. The trial is expected to last at least a week. The outcome will not affect the state’s March 1 presidential primaries.
The plaintiffs claim the photo ID law is unconstitutional because it suppresses voting by blacks, Latinos and young people, who tend to support Democrats.
Their attorney, Bruce Spiva, said in his opening statement that Republicans deliberately passed a discriminatory law because they saw the state’s demographics shifting to their detriment after President Obama carried Virginia in back-to-back elections.
Mark F. Hearne II, an attorney for the Virginia election officials named as defendants, argued that the law is a “racially neutral” attempt to prevent voter fraud.
Comments are not available on this story. Read more about why we allow commenting on some stories and not on others.
We believe it's important to offer commenting on certain stories as a benefit to our readers. At its best, our comments sections can be a productive platform for readers to engage with our journalism, offer thoughts on coverage and issues, and drive conversation in a respectful, solutions-based way. It's a form of open discourse that can be useful to our community, public officials, journalists and others.
We do not enable comments on everything — exceptions include most crime stories, and coverage involving personal tragedy or sensitive issues that invite personal attacks instead of thoughtful discussion.
You can read more here about our commenting policy and terms of use. More information is also found on our FAQs.
Show less