A flurry of states are considering or adopting requirements for a government photo ID to vote, a policy already in place in 11 states. Critics say these laws could discourage voting, while backers call them simple steps to block election fraud. A legal challenge in Pennsylvania was rebuffed last week when a Republican state judge declined to block a new law passed by a Republican-led legislature and signed by a governor from that party. Qualified voters lacking a photo ID "may still cast a ballot" and present identification within six days, says the 70-page opinion. And in Arizona, a federal judge this month upheld a law that requires state voters to provide documents proving their identity.

President Obama's attorney general forcefully opposes steps that tighten voter eligibility rules. "Many of those without IDs would have to travel great distances to get them, and some would struggle to pay for the documents they might need," Eric Holder told a NAACP gathering last month. "We call those poll taxes." Attorney Judith Browne Dianis of the Advancement Project group in Washington, D.C., which tried to block Pennsylvania's law, says voter ID backers are "trying to suppress the vote for partisan gain."

On the other side, ID advocates note that the Supreme Court voted 6-3 in 2008 to uphold a version enacted by Indiana – a decision cited in last week's ruling. The Republican Party chairman in Pennsylvania, Rob Gleason, says critics use "sensational arguments . . . to scare people by touting how the law will keep them from voting" rather than helping them understand "the simple steps needed to comply with the law."

ID law backer says: "Because voting is our most important civil right, we must make sure only those legally entitled to do so can vote. Our voter ID law is to prevent fraud, not voting." -- Carol Aichele, Pennsylvania secretary of the commonwealth (elected leader)

Critic says: "Look, we all know what this is about. We know that all these new rules have been implemented to stop this president [from] getting a second term." -- Film director Spike Lee, Aug. 7 interview at Salon.com

Law professor says: "Whenever you change the rules by enacting new laws, it triggers a round of litigation. I don't think we'll see an end to this anytime soon." -- Dan Tokaji, Ohio State University