Which states have the strictest ID laws in the US?
Executive summary
The strictest voter ID laws are those that require a government-issued photo ID at the polling place and force voters without that ID to cast provisional ballots and take additional steps after Election Day for their ballots to count; several sources identify a core group of states with these restrictive rules, while many more require photo ID but offer easier cures or alternatives (e.g., affidavit signing) [1] [2]. Reporting and academic summaries repeatedly flag Georgia, Tennessee, Kansas, Indiana, Mississippi, Wisconsin and Virginia among the most stringent, but the legal landscape is fluid and other states can be just as restrictive by practice or recent legislation [3] [4].
1. What “strict” means — photo ID plus post‑vote hurdles
Policy trackers and legal summaries define the strictest category not simply by asking for ID but by what happens when a voter lacks one: strict laws require a government‑issued photo ID and convert a vote cast without acceptable ID into a provisional ballot that will only be counted if the voter completes extra verification steps after Election Day; that functional combination is the usual benchmark for “strict” in analyses [1] [5].
2. The usual suspects — states repeatedly named as most restrictive
Multiple analysts point to a relatively consistent list of states at the top of strictness indexes: Georgia, Tennessee, Kansas, Indiana, Mississippi, Wisconsin and Virginia are singled out in university and advocacy summaries as having the most demanding in‑person ID regimes or the most restrictive allied voting rules overall [3] [6].
3. Broader photo‑ID bucket — two dozen states and counting
Beyond that handful, about 24 states require voters to present photo identification to vote in person, while others accept non‑photo ID or offer affidavits and vouching systems; Ballotpedia and aggregated maps put the number of states with some form of voter ID requirement in the mid‑30s, with photo‑ID states a substantial subset of that total [2] [4].
4. Why strict rules matter — effects, debates and competing claims
Proponents say tighter ID rules prevent impersonation and other fraud and point to measures like combined photo and signature requirements (seen in states such as Florida) as common‑sense safeguards; critics and civil‑rights groups argue strict photo‑ID plus cure hurdles disproportionately burden elderly, low‑income, minority and mobility‑limited voters and can suppress turnout, a claim supported by long‑running litigation and research that finds the strictest laws can reduce participation [7] [8] [9].
5. Legislative churn and geographic patterns — the South and swing states
Since the removal of preclearance, many states—particularly in the South—have adopted more restrictive electoral rules and voter‑ID tightening is a continuing legislative trend; watchdog reports document dozens of restrictive measures enacted or proposed in recent sessions, meaning the set of “strictest” states can expand or shift quickly as state legislatures revise what counts as an acceptable cure for missing ID [10] [11].
6. Caveats — maps, definitions and rapid change
State rules vary not only in whether they demand photo ID but in the list of acceptable documents, whether signature matches are required, whether officials may vouch for a voter, and what post‑vote remedies exist; authoritative guides caution that laws change frequently and that any list is a snapshot rather than a definitive, permanent ranking [1] [12] [13].
7. Bottom line — core list plus context
The clearest answer from the available reporting is that Georgia, Tennessee, Kansas, Indiana, Mississippi, Wisconsin and Virginia are commonly identified as the states with the strictest voter‑ID regimes when strictness is measured as mandatory photo ID together with onerous cure requirements, while roughly two dozen states require photo ID and many others impose varying limits and post‑vote procedures; readers should expect this roster to evolve with new laws and court rulings [3] [2] [4].