The Supreme Court is set to discuss on Wednesday whether the voter ID law could alter the voting process in the United States. The disputed law adopted by Indiana stated that in order to avoid fraud, voters should present a current government-issued photo ID, but contesters and critics say that this will discourage Americans, especially the disabled, minorities, the homeless or the poor people who may lack ID but are willing and have the constitutional right to vote.

Considering how “daunting” the process of getting an ID is for some American citizens, the opponents of the law argue that there haven’t been any cases of fraud in Indiana that would call for adopting such a law, and that this would only raise delicate issues, like discrimination, and even discourage the voters. Critics also argue that the law is meant to disadvantage the Democrats, as the Republicans are the one insisting upon it.

But Indiana officials are convinced the law will be approved as constitutional. Indiana Secretary of State Todd Rokita said according to CNNPolitics.com: “The real question is, does it disenfranchise anyone? After six elections in the state of Indiana, the answer has been no … That’s why the opponents to this keep losing in court. They have not been able to produce the person that was truly disenfranchised yet.”

The voter ID law has been highly discussed across the country. Not all of them are still standing: the law had been declared unconstitutional in Missouri, but Georgia, Arizona and Michigan adopted them. The state’s solicitor general wrote to the Supreme Court: “the Indiana Voter ID Law establishes reasonable, long-overdue election-security reform in a State highly vulnerable to in-person election fraud.”

While a decision is expected to be made, Indiana state representatives reject any argument that it is a discriminatory law, making “sinister efforts to disfranchise voters” as petitioners said. “The voter ID law represents a reasonable, non-discriminatory exercise of elections clause authority that, just as the founders envisioned, take account of ‘change in the situation of the country’ and advances the agenda of election modernization,” the Indiana state officials wrote.