In a stinging rebuke, the North Carolina ruling went beyond finding that its provisions merely disenfranchised voters, opining that the effort was the legislature’s deliberate intent in a state that had been largely subject to federal oversight under Voting Rights Act provisions that have since been struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court.
Advertisement
Earlier this month, a federal appeals court ruled that Texas’ strict voter ID law is discriminatory and must be weakened by November.
“In 2013, this government took our voting system-which was a model for the nation in encouraging people to vote, not discouraging them-and they made it into the worst voter suppression act in the country”, Barber added. After getting this info, the General Assembly killed the first seven days of early voting.
The decision by a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit was an overwhelming victory for the Justice Department and civil rights groups that argued the measures were created to dampen the growing political clout of African-American voters, who participated in record numbers in elections in 2008 and 2012.
“I’m just elated they saw fit [to strike down the law] because with the election we have coming up you might have lost a lot of voters we need”, said Ervin Fox, president of the Lee County branch of the NAACP.
Dale Ho, the director of the American Civil Liberties Union’s Voting Rights Projects, questions a witness during a court hearing on whether Kansas must count potentially thousands of votes in state and local races from people who’ve registered without providing proof of their USA citizenship, Friday, July 29, 2016, in Topeka, Kan. “I think we will see more people voting than if these restrictions were still in place”, he said.
Before enacting the 2013 law, lawmakers requested data on the use, by race, of several voting practices, according to the ruling.
Similarly in Kansas, which traditionally votes Republican, a judge ordered the state to count thousands of votes in local and state elections from people who did not provide proof of USA citizenship when they registered.
In the North Carolina case, the 4th Circuit panel agreed with allegations that North Carolina’s omnibus bill selectively chose voter-ID requirements, reduced the number of early-voting days and changed registration procedures in ways meant to harm blacks, who overwhelmingly vote for the Democratic Party. Although the new provisions target African Americans with nearly surgical precision, they constitute inapt remedies for the problems assuredly justifying them and, in fact, impose cures for problems that did not exist. The ruling speculates Republicans may have wanted to target African-Americans due to their tendency to vote for Democratic candidates.
Republicans insist there was no racial basis behind the law.
– No. 3: Voting is easy for anyone who is determined to do so.
The federal court in Richmond, Virginia, found that the primary objective of North Carolina’s wasn’t to stop voter fraud, but rather to disenfranchise minority voters.
VIVA was upheld in April by federal circuit court Judge Thomas D. Schroeder, who found no basis for racial discrimination. Pat McCrory vowed to appeal the decision to the Supreme Court. It also banned same day voter registration and required voters to bring a valid photo identification to the polls.
The judges also correctly refuted Republican lawmakers’ dubious claims that the measure was intended simply to ensure the integrity of elections by preventing potential voter fraud.
The decision was lauded by Democratic Party presidential nominee Hillary Clinton and Attorney General Loretta Lynch, but decried by Republicans including Gov.
Finally, in a non-election-law case with implications for politics, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit rejected former senator Bob Menendez’s challenge to his indictment.
We knew. Some Republicans even admitted it.
Advertisement
Dr. Mark Creech, executive director of the Christian Action League, wrote in defense of the controversial Voter ID law in 2014.
