Which U.S. states have “strict” photo voter ID laws and what exceptions do they allow?
Executive summary
A set of U.S. states are commonly described as having “strict” voter ID regimes—meaning voters who cannot present acceptable identification at the polling place are required to cast a provisional ballot and take additional steps after Election Day for that ballot to be counted—while other states either request ID or allow same‑day affidavits or vouching instead [1] [2]. Different trackers and advocacy groups identify roughly 9–12 states as strict photo‑ID jurisdictions and note important caveats: some states categorized as “strict” still permit narrow alternatives, and maps differ because laws change and agencies apply different definitions [3] [4] [5].
1. Which states are usually labeled “strict” photo‑ID states — the common lists
Several reputable compilations converge on roughly the same set of states when identifying strict photo‑ID regimes: Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Mississippi, Nebraska, North Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, and Wisconsin frequently appear on strict‑photo lists (WorldPopulationReview’s 2025 summary lists these states explicitly) and Brennan Center and MIT Election Lab describe roughly the same regional pattern of strict laws concentrated in the South and Great Lakes [3] [1] [5]. Different organizations count slightly different totals—some say ten states, some nine—because they use different cutoffs (photo vs. non‑photo strictness, or narrow statutory exceptions) and because state statutes and court decisions have shifted requirements in recent years [5] [1] [6].
2. What “strict” means in practice: provisional ballots and post‑election cure windows
“Strict” is a technical classification: under these laws a voter who cannot show an acceptable ID at the polling place typically is given a provisional ballot that will not be counted unless the voter returns within a brief, statutorily defined cure period and presents acceptable identification or otherwise satisfies verification rules (the NCSL/MIT definition of the strict dimension; Wikipedia’s summary of how strict states require additional post‑Election Day action describes this same process) [1] [7]. In short, strict rules do not always permanently bar a voter from having their vote counted, but they require extra steps after Election Day that non‑strict states generally do not demand [7] [8].
3. The common exceptions and workarounds — what voters without ID can often do
Even in many “strict” states there are statutory or administrative safety‑valves: some states allow voters to cast provisional ballots and then cure by presenting ID within days after the election, other states permit voters to sign sworn affidavits attesting to identity, allow a designated person to vouch for the voter, or exempt certain institutionalized voters (for example, residents of state‑licensed nursing homes) (Ballotpedia’s statewide summary and Statista’s chart both document provisional ballots, affidavits, vouching, and nursing‑home exceptions) [2] [8]. Movement Advancement Project flags that Alabama and Wyoming are sometimes categorized as strict even though they contain narrow exceptions that let a small subset of voters cast ballots without the required photo ID, underscoring how the label “strict” can mask important detail [4].
4. Why lists differ and what to watch for — practical reporting caveats
State law language, court rulings, and administrative guidance produce variation: some sources group non‑photo strict laws (e.g., Arizona, North Dakota, Ohio) differently, some count states that “request” but do not strictly require photo ID as non‑strict, and others factor in whether first‑time mail registrants face separate federal ID rules (WorldPopulationReview, NCSL, VoteRiders and MIT Election Lab document these classification challenges and the role of federal first‑time voter ID rules) [3] [6] [9] [1]. Because these classifications shift with legislation and litigation, the authoritative, current answer for any given state is the state election office or updated trackers such as NCSL, Ballotpedia, VoteRiders or Movement Advancement Project [6] [2] [9] [4].
5. Bottom line: a focused reading of the evidence
Multiple trackers point to a core group of Southern and Great Lakes states—notably Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Mississippi, Nebraska, North Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, and Wisconsin—as the places most commonly labeled strict photo‑ID states, but most of those states still include procedural exceptions (provisional ballots plus post‑Election cure windows) and some narrow statutory carve‑outs; different organizations may add Alabama, Wyoming or other states to the “strict” column depending on how they treat those carve‑outs and non‑photo strict statutes, so readers should consult current state election guidance for definitive, actionable rules [3] [2] [4] [1] [5].