Courts & Law

D.C. Circuit Court rules unanimously that Texas redistricting intentionally discriminates against Latinos

by

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

In a major victory for the Obama administration's Justice Department, voting rights advocates, and for the rule of law, a panel of the D.C. Circuit Court ruled unanimously today that the Texas redistricting plan crafted by the Tea-Publican dominated Texas legislature intentionally discriminates against Latinos in violation of the Voting Rights Act. You're shocked, I'm sure. Federal Court: GOP’s Texas Redistricting Plan Intentionally Discriminated Against Hispanics | TPMMuckraker:

PerryA redistricting plan signed by Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R) intentionally discriminated against Hispanic voters, a three-judge panel unanimously ruled Tuesday. The judges found that seats belonging to white incumbent members of Congress were protected under the plan while districts belonging to incumbent minorities were targeted for changes.

The court was “persuaded by the totality of the evidence that the plan was enacted with discriminatory intent,” according to the ruling. There was “sufficient evidence to conclude that the Congressional Plan was motivated, at least in part, by discriminatory intent,” the court found.

All three judges said they were overwhelmed with the amount of evidence showing the law was intentionally discriminatory, writing in a footnote that parties “have provided more evidence of discriminatory intent than we have space, or need, to address here.”

All three redistricting plans — for Texas’ congressional delegation, its state House of Representatives and the state Senate — were blocked by the federal court. The Supreme Court had earlier ruled that interim maps drawn by a federal court were invalid.

The panel of three judges found that “surgery” had been performed on congressional districts belonging to minority members of Congress while no such alterations were made to districts belonging to incumbent white members of Congress.

“Anglo district boundaries were redrawn to include particular country clubs and, in one case, the school belonging to the incumbent’s grandchildren,” the judges wrote.

That country club reference is tied to Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX), who chairs the House Oversight Committee that oversees the Justice Department.

You can read the opinion here (there was a partial dissent by Judge Griffith as to one district, who wrote most of the majority opinion as well). 

Will the Open Primaries initiative be on the Nov 2012 ballot or not? (video)

by

by Pamela Powers Hannley

Backers of the Open Primaries initiative knew from the beginning that changing Arizona's two-party primary system to an open, "top two" primary system wouldn't be easy. They expected challenges from Democrats and Republicans, and that's what they got.

Earlier in the summer, Governor Jan Brewer and the Arizona Legislature tinkered around with ideas to change or stop it. Secretary of State Ken Bennett tried to stop it by saying that it was unconsitutionally broad, but the courts squashed his attack. 

As of mid-August, Open Primaries was back on the ballot, until this week, when Maricopa County said that there were an extraordinary number of bad signatures.

The latest news is that the Open Primaries/Open Government folks have filed a suit to get the initiative back on the ballot. Supporters claim that Maricopa County erroneously rejected.

Stay tuned for the next volley in this ping pong game.

For more background on the Open Primaries initiative– just in case you actually get to vote on it– check out the video debate between former State Rep. Dr. Ted Downing (pro) and former Mayor Tom Volgy (con). The event was sponsored by Progressive Democrats of American Tucson Chapter.

Videos after the jump.

Wild week for election law cases in Arizona

by

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

When I have a case that goes up on appeal, I always have to counsel clients that "the facts are on your side, the law is on your side, and you won in the trial court, but there are no guarantees — sometimes these guys just do whatever they want."

Friday was one of those times. AZ Supreme Court overturns ruling on open primary ballot initiative – East Valley Tribune: 

In a brief order, the justices overturned a lower court ruling which concluded that the initiative to create a wide-open primary was constitutionally flawed. Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Mark Brain had said it illegally dealt with more than one subject.http://ad.doubleclick.net/click;h=v8/3cd5/0/0/*/u;44306;0-0;0;57564054;4307-300/250;0/0/0;;~sscs=?

The justices did not explain their decision, promising details later.

* * *

But the Supreme Court action does not mean the "Open Government/Open Elections'' initiative actually will be on the November ballot.

County election officials are still reviewing a random sample of initiative petition sheets to verify that there are at least 259,213 valid signatures to put the issue on the November ballot. And some preliminary numbers from the state's largest county suggest the petition drive could fall short.

Maricopa County Elections Director Karen Osborne told Capitol Media Services she has checked 12,990 of the 13,076 signatures sent to her. Of those screened, 4,280 are invalid for an validity rate of about 67 percent.

Matt Roberts, spokesman for the Secretary of State's Office, said after clearly invalid petitions were removed, that left more than 358,000 signatures. And a 33 percent failure rate, if that proves to be the final number, would leave just about 240,000 valid signers, short of the 259,213 needed to qualify for the ballot.

Screenshot-7Let's be clear what this initiative is really all about. The Chamber of Commerce establishment Republicans have lost control of the Republican Party to the Christian Reconstructionists and Dominionists, and the Birthers-Birchers-Secessionists fringe groups who have hijacked the GOP and purged the Chamber establishment Republicans from the GOP. The Chamber of Commerce establishment Republicans want "their" party back.

But rather than fight this civil war within the GOP, the Chamber of Commerce establishment Republicans want to rewrite the rules for everyone. They have a simplistic belief that this "top two primary" will magically allow more "moderate" Chamber of Commerce establishment Republicans to get elected — with the added bonus of denying voters any real choice in November by eliminating minor political parties from the general election ballot (Green, Libertarian, Americans Elect), and even Democratic candidates in many Republican voter registration heavy districts, perhaps even statewide races.

Pennsylvania judge rules in favor of Jim Crow – appeal to follow

by

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

The state of Pennsylvania stipulated to the facts that it has no evidence of voter impersonation at the polls and that it does not expect any voter impersonation at the polls this November. Dozens of witnesses testified how they do not have state issued photo ID and Pennsylvania makes it difficult and expensive for them to obtain photo ID (a violation of the 24th Amendment prohibiting poll taxes), which will disenfranchise them of their fundamental constitutional right to vote for no other reason than they do not possess a photo ID. A no brainer, right? Or so every rational human being thought.

A Republican Pennsylvania state court judge today disregarded the overwhelming weight of the evidence and disregarded fundamental constitutional rights by ruling in favor of Pennsylvania Tea-Publican's Jim Crow voter suppression law. Judge won't halt Pa. voter identification law:

A tough new voter identification law championed by Republicans can take effect in Pennsylvania for November's presidential election, a judge ruled Wednesday, despite a torrent of criticism that it will suppress votes among President Barack Obama's supporters and make it harder for the elderly, disabled, poor and young adults to vote.

Commonwealth Court Judge Robert Simpson said he would not grant an injunction that would have halted the law, which requires each voter to show a valid photo ID. Opponents are expected to file an appeal within a day or two to the state Supreme Court as the Nov. 6 election looms.

"We're not done, it's not over," said Witold J. Walczak, an American Civil Liberties Union lawyer who helped argue the case for the plaintiffs. "It's why they make appeals courts."

They’re baaack! Tea-Publican lawsuits against the AIRC

by

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

A follow-up to an earlier post, AIRC Update: Tea-Publican deadbeats sue the AIRC with your tax dollars to overturn Prop. 106 that created the AIRC:

The Tea-Publican controlled legislature is suing the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission (AIRC), arguing that the voter approved Proposition 106 (2000) to the state constitution that created the AIRC violates the U.S. Constitution. And even though only Tea-Publicans argue this for their partisan political advantage, they are using your tax dollars to overturn the will of the voters.

The parties are now filing their pleadings. Howard Fischer reports, in only the way he can, Arizona redistricting commission argues state legislators shouldn't draw Congressional lines – East Valley Tribune: 

Members of the Independent Redistricting Commission want a federal judge to rule that state lawmakers are wrong in saying only they get to draw lines for congressional districts.

In legal papers filed in U.S. District Court, attorneys for the commission acknowledge that the U.S. Constitution does say that the manner of selecting members of Congress "shall be prescribed in each state by the Legislature.'' And it was the commission created the maps used last decade and again last year for the coming decade.

The lawyers, however, told Judge Paul Rosenblatt that process is legal.