Voting Rights Act of 1965

SCOTUS 4-4 tie works in favor of voting rights in North Carolina

by

The death of Justice Antonin Scalia continues to pay dividends.

The state of North Carolina, which enacted the “most discriminatory election law in the nation,” petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to stay the ruling of the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals, which last month struck down the state law.

Amy Howe at SCOTUSblog reports, North Carolina comes up one vote short for stay in election law case:

maxwell_smartA closely divided Court today denied North Carolina’s request to allow the state to enforce three provisions of its controversial 2013 election law when voters go to the polls for this fall’s general elections. The state needed five of the eight Justices to agree to halt a lower court’s ruling that blocked the law, but it came up one short – illustrating the impact of the death of Justice Antonin Scalia, who likely would have joined the Court’s other conservative Justices in voting for the state.

The North Carolina legislature enacted the law in the wake of the Court’s 2013 ruling in Shelby County v. Holder, which struck down the federal formula used to determine which state and local governments must obtain advance approval for any changes to their voting rules. The law would require North Carolina voters to show a government-issued photo ID, reduce the number of days for early voting, and eliminate out-of-precinct voting, same-day voter registration, and preregistration for young voters.

A federal trial court upheld the law against claims that it was racially discriminatory. But in late July of this year, a federal appeals court barred the state from enforcing the law. The court of appeals rejected the state’s explanation that the law was intended to combat voter fraud and “promote public confidence in the election system.” Rather, the court of appeals concluded, the law “hinges explicitly on race—specifically its concern that African Americans, who had overwhelmingly voted for Democrats, had too much access to” voting.

Read more

The House Democrats’ ‘By The People’ (BTP) election reforms package

by

Michael Golden and Lawrence Lessig have an op-ed at the Chicago Sun Times about an election reform package that the Arizona media ignores and does not report. Opinion: Three ways Congress can muscle-up to your voting rights:

Voting-RightsOver the last year, presidential candidates from both parties have ridden to great success the populist cry of a “rigged system” – in which billions of dollars in campaign cash have destroyed the very idea of a representative democracy. The American electorate has embraced this message.

Donald Trump distilled the charge to a dozen words: “When you give, they do whatever the hell you want them to.” And in differing degrees and with different styles, Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton have both attacked the tight grip of campaign cash on the politics of our nation.

But with three months to go before ballots get cast, only one of the two frontrunners – and her party – has unequivocally supported specific plans to solve these problems. And though the presidential race now dominates the media conversation, it is in Congress, which currently carries a 14 percent approval rating, where these solutions will matter the most. The polarization and paralysis on Capitol Hill, stemming from our rigged election system, prevents legislators from negotiating and compromising to make meaningful progress on the issues that Americans consistently prioritize.

Fortunately, some in Congress are working toward a solution. Just before the national conventions, the House Democratic leadership announced its “By The People” (BTP) legislative package. These reforms, backed by 187 members of the rank-and-file, are designed to “revitalize our nation’s voting laws, restore sanity to the electoral process, and empower everyday Americans to reclaim their voice in the political process.”

Read more

Status of pending election law challenges

by

Rick Hasen at Election Law Blog just saved me a lot of work. I was preparing to update the election law challenges in court, but Mr. Hasen has already done the heavy lifting. Thank you Mr. Hasen! Election Litigation 2016: Where Things Stand:

NC-VotingWith 77 days to go until Election Day, and early voting starting much sooner in some places, here is the major litigation affecting election procedures and voting that I’m watching the most closely:

Wisconsin: One trial judge required Wisconsin officials to accept an affidavit instead of one of the strict voter ids for voting. A 7th Circuit panel reversed that holding, and we are awaiting the entire 7th Circuit en banc to rule on this question. A second trial judge struck a number of election rollbacks in Wisconsin, including those limited to early voting. The state has petitioned the 7th Circuit to stay that judge’s order pending appeal. I expect we will hear something on this case this week.

North Carolina: The 4th Circuit struck a number of challenged election rollbacks based upon a finding that North Carolina passed the law with racially discriminatory intent. The state will file a cert. petition in the Supreme Court, and in the meantime it has asked the Supreme Court to reinstate some of the laws that the 4th Circuit blocked. Chief Justice Roberts has asked the plaintiffs to file a reply by this Thursday, the 25th. Expect a ruling the following week (and given the slow pace set by the Chief, I do not expect the stay to be granted so close to the election).

Read more

GOP war on voting rights: Trump election observers and voter intimidation

by

VotersI have been an election observer for many years, working with The Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights under Law or the Democratic Party. There are very strict guidelines on what observers can and cannot do.

The goal of election observers is to assist in resolving any problems that might arise, e.g., helping voters find the right polling location, and making sure that poll workers are assisting voters in resolving any issues to allow them to cast a ballot.

In all the years I have been a poll observer, it has never been my role to challenge a voter on his or her eligibility to cast a vote.

This is something that the Republican Party, however, has engaged in, as well as Republican Party affiliated organizations such as the notorious True the Vote with a “horrendous record of filing inaccurate voter registration challenges.” A Reading Guide to True the Vote, the Controversial Voter Fraud Watchdog.

Donald Trump, who has sought to delegitimize this election by asserting that “the only way he can lose” is if the “system is rigged” and there is “voter fraud,” Trump urges Pennsylvania backers: Don’t just vote, watch for signs of ‘cheating’ on election day, is now rolling out his own “election observers,” who are likely to follow the True the Vote model.

Read more

Democratic Party asks federal court to block AZ ballot collection law

by

As part of an ongoing lawsuit filed earlier this year to challenge our lawless TeaPublican legislature’s election law changes, the Democratic Party asked a federal judge to block the ballot collection provision. Democrats ask federal judge to block ballot collection law:

BallotDropOffLawyers representing state and national Democratic groups opposed to a new Arizona law outlawing collection of early ballots by get-out-the-vote groups urged a federal judge Wednesday to block it from going into effect.

U.S. District Court Judge Douglas L. Rayes heard nearly two hours of arguments Wednesday for and against the Democrats’ request for an injunction blocking the law from taking effect. He said he’ll rule later on the request.

The law makes it a felony to return someone else’s ballot to election officials in most cases. Republicans pushed House Bill 2023 through the Legislature earlier this year, arguing that so-called “ballot harvesting” can lead to election fraud. Gov. Doug Ducey signed it into law in early March, saying it will ensure a chain of custody between the voter and the ballot box.

Read more