The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which is known for being conservative, reaffirmed an earlier ruling that found the law did discriminate.
Advertisement
The New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals struck down the heart of the 2011 state law, widely viewed as one of the nation’s strictest requirements, ruling that it violates Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.
Now, the case goes back to the U.S District Court for the Southern District of Texas. On Tuesday, a federal judge softened a Wisconsin voter ID law, allowing those who had difficulty obtaining the proper identification the option of signing an affidavit as to their identity. A law passed with bias as the motive would be unconstitutional under the Fourteenth Amendment, and none of it could be enforced.
Critics of the law and others like it passed in recent years in Republican-governed states said similar statutes are meant to make it harder for minorities such as African-Americans and Hispanics who tend to back Democrats to vote.
The new ruling “sets up a potential Supreme Court showdown over the contentious issue of state photo ID rules”, USA Today reports.
Who Can’t Vote in the U.S. Elections?
Circuit Judge Stephen A. Higginson, who joined the Haynes opinion in full, wrote a separate concurring opinion (joined by Judge Costa) seeking to answer the objections made by the dissenters to the main ruling that SB 14 had made to the ruling striking down Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.
The full appeals court said U.S. District Judge Nelva Gonzales Ramos had gone too far in finding that the Texas Legislature had a discriminatory intent in passing the law. Dissenting judges wrote that the “en banc court is gravely fractured and without a consensus. Judicial decisions will spawn inconsistent results and uncertainty, leading the public to question judges” impartiality. “This decision will thus foster cynicism about the courts and more rather than less racial tension”.
“It is imperative that the State government safeguards our elections and ensures the integrity of our democratic process”, he added.
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton criticized the court ruling. “As Attorney General I prosecuted cases against voter fraud across the State, and Texas will continue to make sure there is no illegal voting at the ballot box”, he said. The ruling also said the lower court should make changes that disrupt this year’s election season as little as possible.
Hasen, however, said that the state might prefer to avoid the high court at this time.
The court ruled 9-6 that the law had a discriminatory effect.
But Texas is considered the strictest such law, since it spells out just seven forms of acceptable identification to vote.
Texas has been fighting to implement its voter ID law for the past five years. But the 5th Circuit issued a stay, allowing the law to be used in the November 2014 election and thereafter.
Texas could appeal the 5th Circuit decision to the Supreme Court.
Gov. Greg Abbott, a Republican who defended the voter ID law against legal challenges when he was the states attorney general, said the court had come to the wrong conclusion. The judges directed Ramos to reconsider the plaintiffs’ claims that the law was written with a discriminatory goal, but this time she should use “the proper legal standards and evidence, ” the panel said. A district court judge upheld the measure in April.
Advertisement
When the court heard arguments this spring, Janai Nelson, arguing on behalf of the NAACP, said that the law was drafted during a racially charged Texas legislative session and that it disproportionately affected minority voters because blacks and Latinos have shakier access to the resources – namely transportation and readily obtainable birth certificates – needed to get their hands on photo identification.
