Madison - The state Supreme Court refused Monday to immediately take up a pair of cases that struck down the state's new voter ID law, a decision that will likely mean citizens won't have to show identification when they cast ballots in recall elections in May and June.

The court's terse orders send the cases back to two different appeals panels, though the cases could eventually return to the Supreme Court.

The justices issued their orders just three weeks before the May 8 primary for Democrats to pick a candidate to run against Republican Gov. Scott Walker in the June 5 recall election.

Dane County Circuit Judge David Flanagan in March blocked the voter ID law for the April presidential primary, saying it likely disenfranchised voters, based on testimony that there are more than 220,000 Wisconsin residents who do not have photo IDs but who are otherwise qualified to vote.

A trial in that case began Monday, and Flanagan is expected to decide whether to lift his injunction or block the law permanently after it concludes this week. The case was brought by the Milwaukee branch of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People and the immigrant rights group Voces de la Frontera.

Also in March, in a case brought by the League of Women Voters of Wisconsin, Dane County Circuit Judge Richard Niess permanently blocked enforcement of the voter ID law because he said it violated the state constitution. The state constitution allows the Legislature to exclude felons and mentally incompetent people from voting, but not other groups of people. Niess ruled the law creates a new category of people who cannot vote - those without ID - and thus violates the state constitution.

The Department of Justice appealed both decisions - the NAACP case to an appeals panel based in Waukesha, and the League of Women Voters case to one based in Madison. Both appeals panels told the Supreme Court it should take up the cases directly because of their importance.

But the Supreme Court on Monday rejected that plan in two pro-forma orders that were each one sentence long. The court does not typically spell out its rationale for refusing to take such cases, and it followed that standard in these cases.

Edward Fallone, an associate professor at Marquette University Law School, said the rulings mean the voter ID law will likely remain blocked through the recall elections.

The state Department of Justice has asked the appeals panels to lift the injunctions until they render their decisions. That is unlikely, Fallone said.

"It's far easier for the court to leave the status quo in place," he said.

To prevail, the Department of Justice would have to succeed in both appeals, because if even one injunction stays in place, the voter ID law will remain blocked.

The Supreme Court's rulings send the cases back to the appellate level, but since the NAACP trial is occurring this week, the appeals panel may wait until the case finishes in Dane County, Fallone said.

Yearlong wait?

Once the appeals panels rule, the cases can be appealed to the Supreme Court. But that may be more than a year away.

Wisconsin appellate decisions typically take nine to 12 months, according to Lester Pines, an attorney with the League of Women Voters. The Department of Justice has asked the appeals panel to expedite the League's case, but Pines said even if it agrees to do so, he does not believe it would issue a ruling before the recall elections.

The Supreme Court has been deeply divided in pivotal cases in recent years, with conservatives claiming a 4-3 majority. Pines said Monday's rulings shows the justices do not always make decisions along ideological lines.

"What it says is there were not four justices who wanted to take this case up (at this time)," Pines said. "I don't believe the Supreme Court always decides stuff on a four-three basis."

Steven Means, the executive assistant to Republican Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen, said he did not know whether the voter ID law would be in place for the recall elections, but he acknowledged the cases were not moving fast.

"I think that both the court of appeals had an opportunity to move quickly, and the Supreme Court had an opportunity to move quickly, and so far neither of them have done so," Means said.

Walker campaign spokesman Tom Evenson expressed support for the voter ID law, but did not comment on the likelihood that photo IDs would not be required for the recall elections.

"The voter ID measure provides fairness and certainty for Wisconsin elections," Evenson said in a statement. "We are confident that the judicial process will uphold this important law, which has the support of a majority of Wisconsinites."

Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett and former Dane County Executive Kathleen Falk - two of the Democrats running against Walker - issued statements opposing the voter ID law.

"This law shouldn't be in place for any election," Barrett's statement said. "Yes, real acts of voter fraud should never be tolerated. But Scott Walker's voter ID bill is a voter disenfranchisement plan that has no place in an open and free democracy."

"Gov. Scott Walker's efforts to restrict the right to vote violates the values of the people of Wisconsin," Falk's statement said. "As governor, I will bring Wisconsin together, and that means ending Gov. Walker's attacks on the rights of voters, the rights of workers and the rights of women."

Republicans tried for nearly a decade to approve a voter ID law, and they succeeded last year when the GOP took control of state government. The law Walker signed in May said people were allowed to vote only if they showed a driver's license, state-issued ID card, military ID, passport, tribal ID, college ID or naturalization certificate.

The law was in place for the low-turnout February election, and officials said they did not encounter major problems. A month later, the two injunctions were issued blocking the law.

Other states' laws

Seven other states have passed voter ID laws since last year, after Republicans swept many statehouses in 2010. The U.S. Department of Justice has blocked voter ID laws in Texas and South Carolina. Legal challenges are also being discussed in Pennsylvania, Kansas and Tennessee, said Keesha Gaskins, senior counsel at the Brennan Center for Justice at the New York University Law School.

Supporters argue the new laws prevent voter fraud and boost confidence in the election system. Detractors say documented instances of voter impersonation are rare and say the laws simply suppress voting, particularly among minorities, the elderly and students.

The U.S. Supreme Court in 2008 found that Indiana's voter ID law complied with the U.S. Constitution. But Wisconsin's law is more restrictive than Indiana's, and it is being challenged under both the state and U.S. constitutions.

In addition to the two Dane County cases, there are two challenges to the law in federal court in Milwaukee. One was brought by the American Civil Liberties Union, and the other was brought by the League of United Latin American Citizens of Wisconsin, the Milwaukee Area Labor Council and others.

The case brought by the NAACP has gotten much attention, in part because it was the first one to block the law and in part because Flanagan, the judge who issued that order, signed the petition to recall Walker.

Monday's proceedings in that case included video testimony from Ruthelle Frank of Brokaw. Frank does not have a state photo ID and does not have a birth certificate that would allow her to get a free photo ID from the state.

Also, Frank's maiden name is misspelled in state birth records, and correcting that error would cost about $200, according to court testimony. Frank, a regular voter since 1948, said she opposed having to pay to be able to cast a ballot.

"I wasn't interested in obtaining a birth certificate if it was going to cost me money, because I felt I had a right to vote without producing a birth certificate," she said.