This article examines the issue of voter fraud and efforts to regulate it through new photo identification requirements. The overall thesis is that voting fraud is a pretext for a broader agenda to disenfranchise Americans and rig elections. However, the more specific focus of this article is both to examine the evidence of fraud and the litigation around voter IDs thus far, and what supporters of voting rights can learn from both as they move forward and challenge these laws in the future. The Article will argue that the evidence being offered for the photo IDs does not justify the restrictions being imposed. In addition, the Article argues that the courts have generally gotten it wrong when it comes to adjudicating the photo ID claims. Specifically, the Article takes aim at the apparent test articulated in Burdick v. Takushi that seems to justify treating franchise as less than a fundamental right, thereby permitting the adoption of some regulations that adversely impact voting rights. Courts, this article will contend, have generally misapplied the test. Second, it will be argued, the test itself is incoherent and unworkable.