Judge Blocks Indiana Student ID Voting Ban

A federal judge recently halted a law in Indiana aimed at prohibiting college-issued student IDs from being used for voting. The ruling suggests that such a ban likely infringes on the constitutional rights of students and younger voters.

U.S. District Judge Richard Young issued a preliminary injunction on Tuesday regarding Senate Bill 10, a measure that excludes student IDs from the list of acceptable voter identification. For nearly twenty years, Indiana has accepted student IDs, provided they feature the voter’s name, photo, expiration date, and are issued by the state or federal government.

In his 34-page order, Young explained that the plaintiffs demonstrated a compelling argument that SB 10 places an unconstitutional burden on students and young voters, violating their First and Fourteenth Amendment rights. He also mentioned that they established potential irreparable harm, satisfying the standards for a preliminary injunction.

Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita’s office announced its intention to appeal, contending that the state’s voter ID law shouldn’t be altered by judicial exceptions.

The office stated, “Indiana’s voter ID law is essential for election security and integrity.” They believe the law should not be weakened through special exemptions, asserting their commitment to uphold voter identification standards.

Interestingly, some out-of-state college students may already be registered in other states, which might complicate their eligibility to vote in Indiana.

Yet, Judge Young concluded that the ban on student IDs is, well, “probably unconstitutional.” He noted that while an injunction could unbind a democratically enacted law, enforcing what he deemed a “probably unconstitutional statute” made little sense for Indiana.

This ruling represents a setback for Indiana’s Republican-led legislature, which passed SB 10 last year, claiming that student IDs lacked the rigor of Indiana’s driver licenses or state ID cards. Young countered that the state still accepts several forms of identification, including military and tribal IDs, which are often less uniform than student IDs.

He pointed out, “By excluding student IDs as acceptable identification, Defendants have selectively removed a form of ID that meets the neutral standards required by Indiana’s Voter ID Law and has been accepted for nearly twenty years.”

Importantly, the court did not address an alternate argument that the law discriminated based on age, which could violate the 26th Amendment.

The lawsuit was initiated in May 2025 by Count US IN, Women4Change Indiana, and a student named Josh Montagne from Indiana University. Montagne argued that he had successfully used his student ID to vote three times but lacked any other eligible identification since the law’s enactment.

Judge Young’s ruling highlighted that student IDs have long been a standard tool for voting on Indiana college campuses. He cited evidence involving approximately 200,000 students from state universities who previously used these IDs, with Monroe County officials estimating that as many as two-thirds of voters at Indiana University polling places did so in the 2024 general election.

The judge assessed that potentially 40,000 students might be impacted by the restriction, although plaintiffs’ experts had suggested even higher numbers. He remarked that the legislation disproportionately affects college students and younger voters, who don’t generally possess Indiana driver’s licenses and face more challenges in obtaining alternate IDs.

Lastly, Young dismissed the state’s argument that maintaining election integrity justified the law’s changes, stating that there was no evidence of student IDs being associated with voter fraud or causing significant issues in election management.

The court determined that issuing a block on the law shortly before Indiana’s May 4 primary would not lead to chaos as some federal courts have warned against. Young indicated that the ruling mainly reinstates practices that had long been in place in Indiana and would require only minor updates to election materials.

As this case remains at the preliminary injunction stage, the law has not been permanently invalidated. However, it does mean that student IDs aligned with Indiana’s requirements can be utilized in the upcoming election while the legal proceedings continue.