[EL] Breaking News: DOJ Files Section 2 Suit Against Texas on Voter ID; More News

Thu Aug 22 13:09:18 PDT 2013

I continue to be amazed that it is not considered racist to believe that "persons of a certain race or color" are unable to get a photo ID. I know the arguments: they live to far away. it's inconvenient. And some people may live so far away that it really is inconvenient. But that group likely includes people of many races and colors.

Let's be clear: General Holder is alleging that requiring a photo ID targets and denies people of a certain race or color the right to vote. This suggests that he believes people of a certain race or color (Black? Latino?) are incapable (incompetent?) to get a photo ID. 

I continue to be amazed that people do not find that line of thinking racist. I am one White person who believes Black and Latino people are just as capable and competent as I am. And I apologize  to my Black and Latino brothers and sisters for the many White people who disagree with me and think you are incapable of figuring out how to get a photo ID. Rubbish.

On Aug 22, 2013, at 9:38 AM, Rick Hasen <rhasen at law.uci.edu> wrote:

> Breaking: DOJ Sues Texas Over Voter ID using Section 2 of Voting Rights Act
> 
> Posted on August 22, 2013 9:26 am by Rick Hasen
> Press release:
> 
> Department of Justice
> 
> Office of Public Affairs
> FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
> Thursday, August 22, 2013
> Justice Department to File New Lawsuit Against State of Texas Over Voter I.D. Law
> The Department of Justice announced today that it will file a new lawsuit against the State of Texas, the Texas Secretary of State, and the Director of the Texas Department of Public Safety over the                     State’s strict voter photo identification law (SB 14). The United States’ complaint seeks a declaration that SB 14 violates Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, as well as the voting guarantees of the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution.
> 
> Separately, the Department is filing a motion to intervene as a party and a complaint in intervention against the State of Texas and the Texas Secretary of State in the ongoing case of Perez v. Perry (W.D. Tex.), which concerns the state’s redistricting laws. The United States had already filed a statement of interest in this case last month. Today’s action represents a new step by the Department in this case that will allow the United States to formally present evidence about the purpose and effect of the Texas redistricting plans.
> 
> “Today’s action marks another step forward in the Justice Department’s continuing effort to protect the voting rights of all eligible Americans,” said                     Attorney General Eric Holder. “We will not allow the Supreme Court’s recent decision to be interpreted as open season for states to pursue measures that suppress voting rights.  The Department will take action against jurisdictions that attempt to hinder access to the ballot box, no matter where it occurs.  We will keep fighting aggressively to prevent voter disenfranchisement. We are determined to use all available authorities, including remaining sections of the Voting Rights Act, to guard against discrimination and, where appropriate, to ask federal courts to require preclearance of new voting changes.  This represents the Department’s latest action to protect voting rights, but it will not be our last.”
> 
> In the voter ID lawsuit, the United States’ complaint contends that SB 14 was adopted with the purpose, and will have the result, of denying or abridging the right to vote on account of race, color, or membership in a language minority group. The complaint asks the court to prohibit Texas from enforcing the requirements of its law, and also requests that the court order bail-in relief under Section 3 of the Voting Rights Act. If granted, this would subject Texas to a new preclearance                     requirement.
> 
> In the Department’s other filing announced today, the United States seeks a declaration that Texas’s 2011 redistricting plans for the U.S. Congress and the Texas State House of Representatives were adopted with the purpose of denying or abridging the right to vote on account of race, color, or membership in a language minority group in violation of Section 2, as well as the voting guarantees of the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution.   The complaint also requests that the court order bail-in pursuant to Section 3(c) of the Voting Rights Act, to remedy persistent, intentional discrimination in voting within the State of Texas.
> 
> “The Department of Justice will use all the tools it has available to ensure that each citizen can cast a ballot free from impermissible discrimination,” said Jocelyn Samuels, Acting Assistant Attorney General for the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division.  “The right to the franchise is one of the most fundamental promises of American democracy.”
> 
> If the federal courts in either the redistricting or voter identification cases find that the State of Texas should be covered by Section 3(c), then the State would be required to submit voting changes to the U.S. Attorney General or to the federal court for review prior to implementation to ensure that the changes do not have a discriminatory effect or a discriminatory purpose.  The Department has previously participated as amicus in the Perez case, and last month advised the federal court in Texas that the Department believed the imposition of a new preclearance requirement on Texas under Section 3(c) of the Voting Rights Act was appropriate.  Today’s filing asks the Court to allow the Department to participate as a party in further proceedings on the question of whether Texas should be made subject to Section 3(c).
> 
> A federal court in the District of Columbia has previously held that Texas had failed to meet its burden of proving that its 2011 redistricting plans and its 2011 voter identification law were not discriminatory under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act.  These decisions were vacated after the Supreme Court’s June decision in Shelby County v. Holder.  The Supreme Court’s decision left unaffected the non-discrimination requirements of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, as well as the bail-in provisions of Section 3 of the Voting Rights Act, and today’s filings seek to enforce those important protections.
> 
> The filings in the Texas redistricting and Texas voter identification matters will be available on the Civil Rights Division’s website later today.                       More information about the Voting Rights Act and other federal voting laws is available on the Department of Justice website at www.justice.gov/crt/about/vot/.  Complaints about discriminatory voting practices may be reported to the Voting Section of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division at 1-800-253-3931.
> 
> <share_save_171_16.png>
> Posted in Department of Justice, voter id, Voting Rights Act | Comments Off
> Wautaga, NC Elections Board Tries to Alter Meeting Minutes, Keep Out Video of Meetings
> 
> Posted on August 22, 2013 9:13 am by Rick Hasen
> Watch this.
> 
> <share_save_171_16.png>
> Posted in chicanery | Comments Off
> Quote of the Day – Colin Powell
> 
> Posted on August 22, 2013 9:06 am by Rick Hasen
> “You can say what you like, but there is no voter fraud,….How can it be widespread and undetected?”
> 
> —Colin Powell, speaking in North Carolina in front of NC Gov. Pat McCrory
> 
> <share_save_171_16.png>
> Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off
> -- 
> Rick Hasen
> Chancellor's Professor of Law and Political Science
> UC Irvine School of Law
> 401 E. Peltason Dr., Suite 1000
> Irvine, CA 92697-8000
> 949.824.3072 - office
> 949.824.0495 - fax
> rhasen at law.uci.edu
> hhttp://www.law.uci.edu/faculty/full-time/hasen/
> http://electionlawblog.org
> _______________________________________________
> Law-election mailing list
> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20130822/d4118be5/attachment.html>