By of the

Opponents of Wisconsin's photo ID requirement for voters took their case to the U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday, seeking an emergency halt to the state's implementation of the law before the fast approaching Nov. 4 election.

In other action Thursday, the nation's highest court passed over its first opportunity to take action on gay marriage cases from Wisconsin and other states, leaving that historic question for later in its term.

In their petition, voter ID opponents told the Supreme Court that there's not enough time to properly implement the law in the month remaining in the tight race between GOP Gov. Scott Walker and Democratic challenger Mary Burke.

"Thousands of Wisconsin voters stand to be disenfranchised by this law going into effect so close to the election. Hundreds of absentee ballots have already been cast, and the appeals court's order is fueling voter confusion and election chaos. Eleventh-hour changes in election rules have traditionally been disfavored precisely because the risk of disruption is simply too high," said Dale Ho, director of the Voting Rights Project of the American Civil Liberties Union, which represents the voters suing the state.

On Sept. 12, the 7th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in Chicago ruled that the law could be put in place for the election while a lawsuit over the requirement creeps forward, leaving state officials and local election clerks sprinting to put the law in place. Late Wednesday, the 7th Circuit judges who restored voter ID issued an opinion that noted Wisconsin officials could waive the ID requirement for absentee voting.

Wisconsin Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen, who is defending the law in court, said that blocking voter ID anew would sow further confusion and bring about the effect that the law's opponents want to avoid.

"This is surprising and disappointing given the ACLU's previously stated concern over changing the law so close to an election. Apparently, they've abandoned that view and are no longer concerned about voter confusion," Van Hollen said.

The ACLU request was directed at Justice Elena Kagan, the member of the Supreme Court who is responsible for handling emergency petitions from the 7th Circuit, which covers Wisconsin, Illinois and Indiana.

Kagan, an appointee of President Barack Obama, is likely open to the arguments of the voter ID opponents and has the ability to take action on their appeal on her own. But legal experts said it's unlikely that Kagan would act without consulting her colleagues in a case such as this one.

Last week, for instance, Kagan took an emergency request dealing with Ohio's voting laws to her colleagues rather than handle it herself. Kagan ended up in the minority as the Supreme Court blocked an appeals court ruling that would have restored seven days of early voting in that state.

"They tend not to manipulate that procedure," University of Richmond law professor Carl Tobias said of the justices and the emergency petitions.

Laurel Patrick, a spokeswoman for GOP Gov. Scott Walker, repeated her comments from last week that voter ID is a "common-sense reform" that makes it harder to cheat in elections.

At a forum at Milwaukee Area Technical College on Thursday, U.S. Rep. Gwen Moore (D-Wis.) said Republicans are using voter ID to keep Democratic supporters such as minorities from voting. Moore said she had to help get an ID for Vel Phillips — the first woman and first African-American to serve as a Milwaukee alderman and Wisconsin secretary of state.

Phillips is 90 years old and doesn't have a driver's license, Moore explained.

The law requires voters to show certain government-issued photo IDs, such as a driver's license, to vote. The law registers strong support in polling in Wisconsin and was also upheld by the state Supreme Court in a pair of rulings in August.

Arguments released

Last week, opponents of Wisconsin's voter ID law fell just short of getting the full 7th Circuit to reconsider their recent loss in the case before a panel of three judges from that appellate court.

Those suing over the law asked the full 10-member court to reverse that decision and came just one vote shy of getting all 10 judges to hold a hearing on the case. The members of the court split 5-5 on whether to hold the hearing, which means that the request did not get a majority of votes and failed as a result.

The five 7th Circuit judges who voted to rehear the case included two judges appointed by Republicans and three appointed by Democrats. They were: Diane P. Wood and Ann Claire Williams, both appointed by President Bill Clinton; Richard A. Posner, appointed by President Ronald Reagan; Ilana Diamond Rovner, appointed by President George H.W. Bush; and David F. Hamilton, appointed by Obama.

In the arguments released Wednesday, Williams wrote on behalf of that group of five judges that their court should not have acted so soon before Wisconsin's elections.

"Our court should not accept, as the state is willing to do, the disenfranchisement of up to 10% of Wisconsin's registered voters. We certainly should not do so when there is not evidence in Wisconsin whatsoever of the type of fraud the law is designed to prevent against," Williams wrote.

All five who declined to take the case were appointed by Republicans, and three of them sat on the panel that first decided the case. The five were: Joel M. Flaum, Frank H. Easterbrook and Michael S. Kanne, all of whom were appointed by Reagan; and Diane S. Sykes and John Daniel Tinder, who were both appointed by George W. Bush.

The original 7th Circuit panel was made up of Easterbrook, Sykes and Tinder. Sykes formerly served on the Wisconsin Supreme Court. The main decision was an unsigned opinion by that trio.

The three judges argued any changes to the law were not being made just weeks before the election. The voter ID statute has been on the books for three years, meaning officials have had time to develop plans even though the law was blocked for much of that period, they wrote.

They also noted the state has discretion as to whether to require ID for the Nov. 4 elections. State officials could, for instance, require those who vote at the polls to show ID but not those who vote absentee, the judges wrote.

"Indiana has required photo ID at every election since 2005; it is hard to see why Wisconsin cannot do the same, while the validity of its statute remains under review," the panel wrote.

The U.S. Supreme Court upheld Indiana's voter ID law in 2008, and last month the panel considering the Wisconsin case likewise upheld the law here, calling the Badger State's voter ID law "materially identical" to Indiana's.

Absentee ballots

Clerks in Wisconsin are now contacting voters who have cast their absentee ballots to tell them to provide copies of their IDs. The same message is also being delivered to those who have received absentee ballots but not yet returned them.

Absentee ballots from voters who have not provided IDs will not be counted. More than 11,800 people had requested absentee ballots before the 7th Circuit decision on Sept. 12.

Those who go to the polls without the proper form of ID can cast provisional ballots. If the voters show a poll worker or clerk a copy of their ID by 4 p.m. on the Friday after the election, their provisional ballots will be counted.

On Tuesday, the Legislature's budget committee will hold a hearing on state election officials' request for more than $460,000 to run an ad campaign telling voters they will need a photo ID at the polls.

At trial, U.S. District Judge Lynn Adelman in Milwaukee determined about 300,000 registered voters in Wisconsin do not have IDs that qualify for voting. About 70,000 additional people are eligible to vote but not registered.

Karen Herzog of the Journal Sentinel contributed to this article from Milwaukee.