GOP Seeks to Overturn Historic Civil Rights Law

Voting Rights Under Attack
Friday, September 7, 2012 by Common Dreams

Civil rights leader Rep. John Lewis (D-GA) told the audience at the Democratic National Convention Thursday night, “we have come too far together to ever turn back,” warning that Republican-led voter suppression laws are taking America back to the days when states had the right to deny voting capabilities to minority voters. Voting rights for minority voters continue to come under attack as Republican leaders are now turning to the Supreme Court to overturn historic civil rights legislation.

Several federal judges recently struck down voter suppression laws in multiple states, introduced by Republican legislators and governors, such as voter identification laws, provisional voting restrictions, limits on voter registration drives, and reduced availability for early voting.

The court rulings in Florida, Ohio, Texas, and Wisconsin, marked a widespread rejection of so called 'voter fraud' legislation, which seeks to greatly limit who can and cannot vote.

However, as Chris McGreal at the Guardian reports today, "Several state governments are [now] looking to the conservative-leaning supreme court, which has already expressed its doubts about racially-based policy," in order to overturn these rulings. This step would seek to challenge the historic Voter Rights Act of 1965, which gave the federal government some control over voting rules in states with a history of blocking African Americans from voting.

In question is Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, which requires "pre-clearance" for nine states – Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, Texas and Virginia – before making changes to voting laws or procedures.

Civil rights leaders and activists have expressed concern over whether the Supreme Court will actually uphold this anti-discrimination law.

"The question is not whether Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act will be struck down, but when and how. Will it die a death of a thousand cuts? Or will it be killed with one swift blow?" Nathaniel Persily, a Columbia University law professor, told the Guardian.

"There has been a proliferation of cases that aim to take down and rip out this core provision of the Voting Rights Act," said Debo Adegbile, acting president and lead counsel of the NAACP legal defense fund. "I think it's fair to say that the supreme court invited these challenges."

Speaking to the DNC Thursday, Lewis continued:

Brothers and sisters, do you want to go back? Or do you want to keep America moving forward? My dear friends, your vote is precious, almost sacred. It is the most powerful, nonviolent tool we have to create a more perfect union. Not too long ago, people stood in unmovable lines. They had to pass a so-called literacy test, pay a poll tax. On one occasion, a man was asked to count the number of bubbles in a bar of soap. On another occasion, one was asked to count the jelly beans in a jar—all to keep them from casting their ballots.

Today it is unbelievable that there are Republican officials still trying to stop some people from voting. They are changing the rules, cutting polling hours and imposing requirements intended to suppress the vote. The Republican leader in the Pennsylvania House even bragged that his state’s new voter ID law is “gonna allow Governor Romney to win the state.” That’s not right. That’s not fair. That’s not just.

Federal court rejects Texas' voter ID law

by MATT GOODMAN & BRAD WATSON 
wfaa.com
Posted on August 30, 2012

DALLAS – A federal court has swatted down Texas’ voter ID law, saying it would likely disenfranchise poor and minority voters.  

Although the state hoped the law –– passed by the Republican controlled legislature last year and signed by Governor Perry –– would be in effect for the November election, the likelihood is now remote since Texas said it needed a ruling by Aug. 31 to proceed.

The 56 page opinion, issued Thursday morning by a three-judge panel in Washington D.C., said the ID law would be “the most stringent in the country” and “would almost certainly have retrogressive effect.” 

Quoting from the opinion:

“It imposes strict, unforgiving burdens on the poor, and racial minorities in Texas are disproportionately likely to live in poverty.” 

Presented during the last legislative session by state Sen. Troy Fraser (R –– Horseshoe Bay), Texas Senate Bill 14 would require voters to present a driver’s license or state ID, a passport or a Texas concealed weapon license before voting at a polling booth. 

The law triggered a bitter divide along party lines, sparking controversy among state and federal politicians. Supporters maintain it's needed to stop voter fraud.

Critics, which include the Obama Administration, have said the law would keep poor and elderly voters from the polls because 81 of the state’s 254 Texas counties lack DMV offices, making it difficult for them to obtain necessary identification. 

 

In July, Attorney General Eric Holder veered from his prepared comments at an NAACP conference in Houston, equating the bill to a modern-day poll tax.

“Under the proposed law, concealed handgun licenses would be acceptable forms of photo ID but student IDs would not,” Holder said, in a video of the speech posted by the Talking Points Memo. “Many of those without IDs would have to travel great distances to get them and many of them would struggle to pay for the documents they might need to obtain them. We call those poll taxes.” 

The Department of Justice cited the difficulty in acquiring identification when it initially blocked the legislation. In the most recent opinion, the three-judge panel elaborated further by comparing Senate Bill 14 to Georgia’s voter ID law. 

In order to gain preclearance from the attorney general, as required by the federal Voting Rights Act,  the state must prove that “all prospective voters can easily obtain free photo ID” and “that any underlying documents required to obtain that ID are truly free of charge. 

Quoting again from the opinion: 

“Unlike SB 14, the Georgia law requires each county to provide free election IDs and further allows voters to present a wide range of documents to obtain those IDs. The contrast with Senate Bill 14 could hardly be more stark.” 

In a statement, Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott promised an appeal to the Supreme Court, saying:

“Today's decision is wrong on the law and improperly prevents Texas from implementing the same type of ballot integrity safeguards that are employed by Georgia and Indiana - and were upheld by the Supreme Court. The State will appeal this decision to the U.S. Supreme Court, where we are confident we will prevail."

But the Mexican American Legislative Caucus hailed the ruling as victory for all Texans. 

“It would have muffled the voice of those that need government’s ear the most - Latinos, African Americans, the poor, and the elderly,"  said Rep. Trey Martinez Fischer (D-San Antonio), Chairman of MALC.

Court sets July 9 trial date in Texas voter ID case

Court sets July 9 trial date in Texas voter ID case
The D.C. district court has set trial in Texas’ voter ID suit for July 9-13.

That’s nearly three weeks earlier than requested by the Justice Department and intervenors.

However, the court also directed that issues related to the constitutionality of section 5 of the Voting Rights Act be bifurcated from the main trial and said that those issues would “not be addressed unless the Court denies judicial preclearance of Senate Bill [14].”

Since that means that hearings on constitutional issues would take place only after a ruling on the preclearance claims (by definition some time after the July 13 end of trial), that would seem to make it less likely that the constitutional issues could be teed up in time to get them to the Supreme Court before the November elections.
The court’s scheduling order set a discovery cutoff of June 15 for both fact and expert testimony and directed that any dispositive motions (such as a motion for summary judgment) be filed by June 18.