A big win for the White House and critics of voter ID laws: A federal appeals court ruled Wednesday that Texas’ strict law discriminates against minorities and the poor and must be weakened before the November elections.
Advertisement
Texas can require voters to show a driver’s license or another form of approved photo identification to cast a ballot for president in November, a federal appeals court ruled.
“Preventing voter fraud is essential to accurately reflecting the will of Texas voters during elections, and it is unfortunate that this common-sense law… was not upheld in its entirety”, he said in a statement.
While the 1965 law required that lawmakers in states with a history of discriminating against minority voters get federal permission before changing voting rules, in a 5-4 decision the court’s conservative block decreed that voting discrimination was no longer a threat in America, Atlanta Black Star reports.
“No American should ever lose their right to vote just because they don’t have a photo ID”, said Myrna Perez of the Brennan Center, one of the law’s challengers.
Texas passed the voter ID law in 2011 but it did not go into effect until 2013 after the Supreme Court invalidated a key section of the Voting Rights Act.
“It is imperative that the state government safeguards our elections and ensures the integrity of our democratic process”, Attorney General Ken Paxton said. If the court deadlocks, the 5th Circuit’s en banc decision holds.
Barring Supreme Court intervention, Texas residents unable to secure photo identification before the November 8 general election will not be prevented from voting, the USA 5th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Wednesday.
“Today is a great day for the secure voting rights of all Americans but it is a watershed day in the protection of voters in Texas who have recently been under attack by state leaders”, said Chad Dunn, a lawyer for some of the plaintiffs. The ruling instructs a lower court to make changes that fix the “discriminatory effect” of the 2011 law in the months leading up to this fall’s election. “There is no majority opinion, but only a plurality opinion that draws six separate dissenting opinions and a special concurrence”. “I look forward to working with my colleagues to create election laws worthy of the promise of our democracy”.
Upon initial appeal, a three-judge panel of the Fifth Circuit reversed Gonzales’ ruling in part in 2015 noting that the law was not clearly passed within discriminatory intent, but could harm minorities all the same.
“The Texas voter ID law has been in place for multiple elections and turnout data shows no evidence whatsoever that it kept anyone out of the polls …”
That set up Wednesday’s ruling, in which the full 5th Circuit rejected the notion that the law was like a poll tax, but upheld the previous decision that its effect was nonetheless discriminatory.
An analysis by the NAACP and the Mexican American Legislative Caucus, which jointly brought the lawsuit against the state, found that registered African-American voters were 305% more likely not to have an accepted form of ID, while registered Latino voters were 195% more likely. It also included suggestions that the law perhaps meant to discriminate meaning future cases could put Voting Rights Act preclearance back on the table for Texas.
The ruling is a victory for voting rights advocates.
Then, the Supreme Court in April let the law remain in effect, but said, “If, on or before July 20, 2016, the Court of Appeals has neither issued an opinion on the merits of the case nor issued an order vacating or modifying the current stay order, an aggrieved party may seek interim relief from this Court by filing an appropriate application”.
Advertisement
“If Texas had been allowed to do what it’s been trying to do, that would be a green light for other states to try something similar”, Hansen said.
