The Wisconsin Government Accountability Board director does not want the Wisconsin Supreme Court to rule on the voter ID law until after November, disagreeing with the attorney general’s suggestion that the board rule before the elections.

GAB Director Kevin Kennedy said the board would have administrative concerns if the Supreme Court were to uphold the law prior to the elections.

As the GAB is an independent board made up of retired judges, the agency does not favor a certain ruling on the law and only wants the decision to come after the elections, as election clerks have little time to be trained about the details in the law.

League of Women Voters of Wisconsin Education Network Executive Director Andrea Kaminski, whose group has won one of the two permanent injunctions on the law, said she was pleased with Kennedy’s statements on the issue and added her group has been working to eliminate any potential confusion on election laws.

“We are trying to get everyone on the same page so that there isn’t confusion at the polls,” Kaminski said. “To change the rules at this point would be disastrous.”

She added a reversal might also be bad for not only election clerks, but also voters themselves, as many might be impeded from voting. Kaminski said the reason why some may not be able to vote is it can take time to get a proper identification. She said this is because there is lots of “jump[ing] through hoops,” such as some acquiring a birth certificate.

Last month, Wisconsin Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen said in a statement the Supreme Court should take up the case before the elections and not delay the issue further.

“People in this state are very frustrated that a common sense law enacted by the Legislature and signed by the governor has been blocked,” Van Hollen said in August. “While I respect the judicial process and the right to challenge a law in court, it is time for our Supreme Court to take control of these cases.”

Van Hollen spokesperson Dana Brueck noted the law, prior to the permanent injunctions, was in place for elections in February.

Brueck said the law has faced objections for months, but the Department of Justice’s opinion is “unchanged.” She added to Van Hollen’s comments on why the injunctions should be overturned.

“[Van Hollen] and the Department of Justice have a duty to defend state law,” Brueck said in an email to The Badger Herald. “As we’ve indicated, voter ID represents the public policy of the state as decided by the Legislature.”

Brueck emphasized that reasoning in the rest of her comments, saying although Kennedy’s concerns are valid, the law has to be enforced as passed.

“While we understand the practical demands of overseeing an election, particularly when injunctions have prevented existing law from being applied in previous elections, voter ID is the law of the state of Wisconsin and should be in place for the November election,” Brueck said.

Aside from the state lawsuits that are being blocked by a permanent injunction in state courts, there are also two different lawsuits in federal courts on the basis that the law challenges the federal Voting Rights Act.