[EL] ELB News and Commentary APRIL 1, 2021

Thu Apr 1 07:21:48 PDT 2021

Brennan Center: Number of Suppressive Voting Bills Up to 361; 5 Laws Already Enacted<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=121424>
Posted on April 1, 2021 7:10 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=121424> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

New roundup:<https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/voting-laws-roundup-march-2021>

In a backlash to 2020’s historic voter turnout, and under the pretense of responding to baseless<https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/refuting-myth-voter-fraud-yet-again> and racist allegations of voter fraud and election irregularities, state lawmakers have introduced a startling number of bills to curb the vote. As of March 24, legislators have introduced 361 bills with restrictive provisions in 47 states. That’s 108 more than the 253 restrictive bills tallied as of February 19, 2021 — a 43 percent increase in little more than a month.

These measures have begun to be enacted. Five restrictive bills have already been signed into law.  In addition, at least 55 restrictive bills in 24 states are moving through legislatures: 29 have passed at least one chamber, while another 26 have had some sort of committee action (e.g., a hearing, an amendment, or a committee vote).

Most restrictive bills take aim at absentee voting, while nearly a quarter seek stricter voter ID requirements. State lawmakers also aim to make voter registration harder, expand voter roll purges or adopt flawed practices that would risk improper purges, and cut back on early voting. The states that have seen the largest number of restrictive bills introduced are Texas (49 bills), Georgia (25 bills), and Arizona (23 bills). Bills are actively moving in the Texas and Arizona statehouses, and Georgia enacted an omnibus voter suppression bill last week.

Many bills seek to undermine the power of local officials. After county election officials conducted elections during a pandemic and stood up to pressure to manipulate the results, state lawmakers are now seeking new criminal penalties to target these officials.

Federal voting rights legislation now moving through Congress would override many of these state-level restrictions, and some state lawmakers are responding. Some have introduced nonbinding resolutions to oppose the For the People Act<https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/policy-solutions/annotated-guide-people-act-2021>. Texas lawmakers have proposed setting up a parallel system with its own rules for state contests if the federal law is enacted.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D121424&title=Brennan%20Center%3A%20Number%20of%20Suppressive%20Voting%20Bills%20Up%20to%20361%3B%205%20Laws%20Already%20Enacted>
Posted in chicanery<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>, fraudulent fraud squad<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=8>

“Black Executives Press Companies to Battle GOP State Voting Laws”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=121422>
Posted on April 1, 2021 7:04 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=121422> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

WSJ reports.<https://www.wsj.com/articles/black-executives-put-pressure-on-companies-to-battle-state-voting-laws-11617211058?st=3rcindduvdxy4fj&reflink=article_copyURL_share>
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D121422&title=%E2%80%9CBlack%20Executives%20Press%20Companies%20to%20Battle%20GOP%20State%20Voting%20Laws%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>

Doug Spencer: A Rare Purposive Reading of the Voting Rights Act<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=121420>
Posted on April 1, 2021 7:02 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=121420> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

The following is a guest post from Doug Spencer:<https://www.law.uconn.edu/faculty/profiles/douglas-m-spencer>

There has been a lot of attention lately on the impending narrowing of Section 2 of the VRA, from redistricting<https://www.yalelawjournal.org/article/the-race-blind-future-of-voting-rights> to vote denial<https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/brnovich-v-democratic-national-committee/> cases. Thus, I wanted to flag yesterday’s opinion<https://www.scribd.com/document/501194514/Holloway-Opinion> from the Eastern District of Virginia that endorses the view that minority coalitions can bring claims under Section 2. Judge Jackson, whose 135-page opinion is as meticulous as any I’ve ever read, notes that “the legislative history of the VRA shows that Congress intended for broad protection of minorities as a group of citizens” (slip op. at 49). Judge Jackson’s purposive reading of the VRA could potentially open the door to stronger protections of minority voting rights, particularly in places with significant multiracial populations, but where no single racial minority group is large enough or compact enough to form a majority-minority district as required under Bartlett.

Disclaimer: I was one of the trial experts on behalf of the plaintiffs. However, I don’t want to focus on any of the expert reports or statistical conclusions in the case. Instead, I want to draw attention to the careful analysis by Judge Jackson for why coalitional claims are cognizable under Section 2.
Continue reading →<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=121420#more-121420>
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D121420&title=Doug%20Spencer%3A%20A%20Rare%20Purposive%20Reading%20of%20the%20Voting%20Rights%20Act>
Posted in Voting Rights Act<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15>

“In Georgia, will courts leave the fox in charge of the hen house?”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=121418>
Posted on April 1, 2021 6:57 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=121418> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Josh Douglas CNN oped.<https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/31/opinions/georgia-voting-restrictions-legal-action-douglas/index.html>
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D121418&title=%E2%80%9CIn%20Georgia%2C%20will%20courts%20leave%20the%20fox%20in%20charge%20of%20the%20hen%20house%3F%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Voting Rights Act<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15>

“Texas Senate advances bill limiting how and when voters can cast ballots, receive mail-in voting applications”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=121416>
Posted on April 1, 2021 6:52 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=121416> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Texas Tribune<https://www.texastribune.org/2021/04/01/texas-voting-restrictions-legislature/amp/?__twitter_impression=true>:

Senate Republicans on Thursday cleared the way for new, sweeping restrictions to voting in Texas that take particular aim at forbidding local efforts meant to widen access.

In an overnight vote after more than seven hours of debate, the Texas Senate signed off on Senate Bill 7<https://capitol.texas.gov/BillLookup/history.aspx?LegSess=87R&Bill=SB7>, which would limit extended early voting hours, prohibit drive-thru voting and make it illegal for local election officials to proactively send applications to vote by mail to voters, even if they qualify.

The legislation is at the forefront of Texas Republicans’ crusade to further restrict voting<https://www.texastribune.org/2021/03/22/texas-republicans-voting-restrictions/> in the state following last year’s election. Though Republicans remain in full control of state government<https://www.texastribune.org/2020/11/04/texas-republicans-election-results/>, Texas saw the highest turnout in decades in 2020, with Democrats continuing to drive up their vote counts in the state’s urban centers and diversifying suburban communities<https://www.texastribune.org/2020/11/06/texas-trump-biden-counties-rural-suburban-city/>.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D121416&title=%E2%80%9CTexas%20Senate%20advances%20bill%20limiting%20how%20and%20when%20voters%20can%20cast%20ballots%2C%20receive%20mail-in%20voting%20applications%E2%80%9D>
Posted in The Voting Wars<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>

Supreme Court: Election Litigation That Doesn’t Come Too Early Comes Too Late<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=121414>
Posted on April 1, 2021 6:47 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=121414> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

AP<https://9to5google.com/2021/03/31/google-april-fools-2021-canceled/>:

A divided Supreme Court ruled today that there is no right time to file a case contending that an election law unconstitutionally violates the right to vote protected by the U.S. Constitution’s equal protection clause.

On a 6-3 vote, the Court in an unsigned (per curiam) opinion explained that lawsuits protecting voting rights cannot be filed well before the election, because in those cases the claims are “unripe” and plaintiffs lack standing due to the speculative nature of such claims. But claims cannot be filed too close to the election, under what has come to be known as the “Purcell Principle,” because changes in election laws close to the election risk confusion of voters and election administrators.

“Although we held in the 1886 case of Yick Wo v. Hopkins that voting rights are fundamental because they are ‘preservative’ of all other rights, that is no excuse to ignore limits on the courts’ jurisdiction to hear only ‘cases and controversies’ and to limit states’ unfettered ability to suppress the vote for political reasons,” the opinion explains.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D121414&title=Supreme%20Court%3A%20Election%20Litigation%20That%20Doesn%E2%80%99t%20Come%20Too%20Early%20Comes%20Too%20Late>
Posted in election law "humor"<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=52>

Federal District Court Rejects More Challenges as Part of Fair Fight Action’s Large Attack on Georgia Voting Laws; Other Voting Challenges Remain Pending<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=121412>
Posted on April 1, 2021 6:37 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=121412> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

You can find the court’s opinion at this link<https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.gand.257857/gov.uscourts.gand.257857.617.0_2.pdf>. (I had high hopes <https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/11/stacey-abrams-georgia-voting-rights-lawsuit.html> for this litigation.)
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D121412&title=Federal%20District%20Court%20Rejects%20More%20Challenges%20as%20Part%20of%20Fair%20Fight%20Action%E2%80%99s%20Large%20Attack%20on%20Georgia%20Voting%20Laws%3B%20Other%20Voting%20Challenges%20Remain%20Pending>
Posted in Voting Rights Act<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15>

“Iowa Democrat Rita Hart, claiming ‘toxic campaign of political disinformation,’ withdraws election challenge in Iowa’s 2nd District”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=121410>
Posted on April 1, 2021 6:31 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=121410> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Des Moines Register:<https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/2021/03/31/iowas-2nd-district-democrat-rita-hart-drops-u-s-house-election-challenge-to-miller-meeks/4826109001/?mkt_tok=ODUwLVRBQS01MTEAAAF8LGojL_ldBim7iECsVoOD-4WzRSJy6rERxzISGsJEYCYTIKy5ArHoiSgF1_izm6BB3LdsyDPK5Q7Pd2WOH_gBfKE3QPyThiszTXI-6JJW0vxC>

Iowa Democrat Rita Hart is withdrawing her challenge to U.S. Rep. Mariannette Miller Meeks’ election in Iowa’s 2nd Congressional District following what she claimed was a toxic disinformation campaign, she announced Wednesday.

The move puts an end to a bitter partisan fight that has rippled across the country and that threatened to drag on through the summer. The sudden reversal also takes pressure off moderate and vulnerable Democrats<https://twitter.com/RepDeanPhillips/status/1373995713512759297?s=20> who have appeared to grow increasingly uncomfortable with the possibility of voting to overturn a state-certified election.

But even as she ended her official challenge, Hart made clear Wednesday that she stands by her claims.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D121410&title=%E2%80%9CIowa%20Democrat%20Rita%20Hart%2C%20claiming%20%E2%80%98toxic%20campaign%20of%20political%20disinformation%2C%E2%80%99%20withdraws%20election%20challenge%20in%20Iowa%E2%80%99s%202nd%20District%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>

Georgia Legislators Advance Bill Making Standing in Line to Vote Over 30 Minutes a “Loitering” Crime Subject to Imprisonment<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=121408>
Posted on April 1, 2021 6:28 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=121408> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

AJC<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xvFZjo5PgG0>:

Fresh on the heels of a new restrictive voting law prohibiting the provision of even water to voters who wait in line to vote, Georgia legislators on the last day of the legislative session advanced a measure criminalizing line-standing. Under the bill, any voter waiting more than 30 minutes in a voting line may be criminally punished for illegal loitering. Governor Kemp is expected to sign the measure.

“We understand in big cities, where lines typically are the longest, people want to vote like other Georgians,” a statement from Republican legislative leaders read. “But those rights need to be balanced with the right to tranquility and quiet in our streets.”

The Honest Elections Project praised the bill as a “common sense” measure aimed at bolstering voter confidence and preventing fraud. Heritage Action said the proposed law was necessary to prevent non-citizens in big cities from voting.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D121408&title=Georgia%20Legislators%20Advance%20Bill%20Making%20Standing%20in%20Line%20to%20Vote%20Over%2030%20Minutes%20a%20%E2%80%9CLoitering%E2%80%9D%20Crime%20Subject%20to%20Imprisonment>
Posted in election law "humor"<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=52>

“As GOP Legislators Push Voting Overhauls, Republican Confidence in Elections Remains Low”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=121406>
Posted on April 1, 2021 6:20 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=121406> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Morning Consult:<https://morningconsult.com/2021/04/01/gop-election-trust-polling/?mkt_tok=ODUwLVRBQS01MTEAAAF8LGojMGWTpAjhYcEMNlrdXPZFBqrPPfkcqBIwsLMig51GBgd_BT7hV3LfuDffiJCHQYVT0uAMJJK3Nq7ZWFhYAsdBZRjHXDCp_UlZ4PNWvKXe&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email_newsletter&utm_campaign=feature_story&utm_content=Yokley_Washington_1_040121>

President Joe Biden’s victory in November elicited a sharp drop in election confidence among Republicans that, nearly five months later, has not yet recovered.

According to Morning Consult’s tracking of U.S. adults’ trust in a number of American institutions<https://morningconsult.com/tracking-trust-in-institutions/>, faith in the country’s electoral system – largely bolstered by Republicans in advance of Nov. 3 – continues to rest on the backs of Democrats in the wake of former President Donald Trump’s loss, with self-identified independents almost evenly split and Republicans continuing to sour even as state GOP leaders advance restrictive measures meant to shore up their base’s confidence.

An average of four Morning Consult surveys conducted in March found 3 in 5 Republicans said they don’t have much or any trust in the electoral system, up 6 percentage points from an average of three November surveys conducted after the race was called for Biden on Nov. 7.

Over the same time period, the share of Democrats and independents who said they at least somewhat trust the elections system has grown 3 points, to 67 percent and 48 percent, respectively, though 52 percent of independents still express at least some doubt.

The movement among Republicans was even more drastic when compared to polling conducted since before the November election – part of a larger decline in sentiment among the group about nearly all of the 19 institutions tested in the surveys since Biden’s victory.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D121406&title=%E2%80%9CAs%20GOP%20Legislators%20Push%20Voting%20Overhauls%2C%20Republican%20Confidence%20in%20Elections%20Remains%20Low%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>

“Arizona Senate hires a ‘Stop the Steal’ advocate to lead 2020 election audit”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=121403>
Posted on March 31, 2021 5:18 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=121403> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

AZ Mirror:<https://www.azmirror.com/2021/03/31/arizona-senate-hires-a-stop-the-steal-advocate-to-lead-2020-election-audit/>

The audit team that Senate President Karen Fann selected to examine the 2020 general election in Maricopa County will be led by a company owned by an advocate of the “Stop the Steal” movement who repeatedly alleged on social media that the election was rigged against former President Donald Trump.

Fann announced on Wednesday that she’d selected four companies to participate in an extensive audit and recount of the election, led by Cyber Ninjas, an Florida-based cybersecurity company. Cyber Ninjas is owned by Doug Logan, who has been an active promoter of baseless conspiracy theories alleging widespread election fraud last year, including in Arizona.

“I’m tired of hearing people say there was no fraud. It happened, it’s real, and people better get wise fast,” read a tweet from a since-suspended account that Logan retweeted on Dec. 31.

MORE<https://twitter.com/jeremyduda/status/1377395009821962240?s=20>:
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D121403&title=%E2%80%9CArizona%20Senate%20hires%20a%20%E2%80%98Stop%20the%20Steal%E2%80%99%20advocate%20to%20lead%202020%20election%20audit%E2%80%9D>
Posted in chicanery<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>, fraudulent fraud squad<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=8>

UCLA Voting Rights Project Publishes Model Code for State Voting Rights Act<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=121401>
Posted on March 31, 2021 1:25 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=121401> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Release:

The UCLA Voting Rights Project has just released to the public its Model State-level Voting Rights Act for voting rights advocates, state legislators, and others involved in the law-making process to utilize in advocating for and drafting pro-voting rights legislation in their own states. For decades, the federal Voting Rights Act of 1965 (VRA) has protected the right to vote across the country. Unfortunately, in 2013 the Supreme Court gutted one of the most significant portions of the VRA in Shelby County v. Holder, when it struck down the coverage formula in Section 4(b). This means that states with a history of disenfranchising voters of color no longer have to seek approval from the Department of Justice or a federal court to enact changes to their voting laws.  Despite a weakened VRA, individual states have been slow to adopt legislation to guarantee the right to vote, and few states currently enshrine state level causes of action that enable individual voters or groups representing voters to challenge voting and election laws or schemes. As the right to vote faces increasing threats, it is clear that state level voting rights protections are necessary.

Legal Director Chad W. Dunn issued the following statement: “The goal of the model code is to provide states and advocates with policy options that fit best for an individual state and ensure that all voters have equal access to the ballot box. This is especially important because voters now need even more robust protections of the fundamental right to vote.”

To learn more about the code and download the code, please visit https://latino.ucla.edu/research/model-code/
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D121401&title=UCLA%20Voting%20Rights%20Project%20Publishes%20Model%20Code%20for%20State%20Voting%20Rights%20Act>
Posted in Voting Rights Act<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15>

California Citizens Redistricting Commission Seeks Chief Counsel<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=121399>
Posted on March 31, 2021 1:22 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=121399> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Announcement:

he California Citizens Redistricting Commission (Commission) seeks a Chief Counsel with demonstrated experience and expertise in implementation and enforcement of Administrative or Constitutional law, combined with the background and knowledge to support the Commission’s redistricting mission.  The applicant should be a creative problem-solver with strong communication, negotiation, and relationship building skills.  A strong candidate for this position will have a background in the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act requirements and experience advising public commissions, boards, agencies or departments.
THE JOB

This is an exempt executive assignment position, non-tenured, full time, and is appointed by the Commission.

Employees of the Commission occupy non civil service positions serving at the pleasure of the Commission.

This position is Limited Term 24 months. It will not become permanent; it may be extended or be canceled at any time.

The position will be located in Sacramento, California.  Frequent travel may be required.

THE COMMISSION

The Commission is a 14-member body created by the passage of the Voters FIRST Act, in 2008.  It is charged with redrawing the California State Senate and Assembly, State Board of Equalization, and Congressional districts based on information gathered during the 2020 census. The Commission must draw the districts in conformity with strict, nonpartisan rules designed to create districts of reasonably equal population that will provide fair representation for all Californians. It is a further mandate that this process be conducted in an open and transparent manner, allowing for participation by the public.

For further details, including salary range and instructions on the application process, visit the link at https://www.wedrawthelinesca.org/jobs_contracting
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D121399&title=California%20Citizens%20Redistricting%20Commission%20Seeks%20Chief%20Counsel>
Posted in redistricting<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>

“The Dynamics of Democratic Breakdown: A Case Study of the American Civil War”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=121397>
Posted on March 31, 2021 1:21 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=121397> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Anthony Gaughan has posted this draft<https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3815115> on SSRN (forthcoming, British Journal of American Legal Studies). Here is the abstract:

The United States emerged from the 2020 presidential campaign more profoundly divided than at any time since the Civil War. Donald Trump’s false claims of election fraud further inflamed those divisions. When Trump supporters stormed the United States Capitol Building to try to overturn the election results, it became undeniably clear that the nation had entered a dangerous new era of political violence. Since the election, experts on both ends of the political spectrum have warned of the possibility of a full-fledged democratic breakdown in the United States.

This article places America’s polarization in historical context by examining the only democratic breakdown in the nation’s history: the Civil War. When Abraham Lincoln and the Republican Party won the 1860 presidential election, the slaveholding South refused to be bound by the election results. Instead of looking ahead to the next presidential election campaign, eleven southern states chose to secede. The conflict that ensued remains the bloodiest war in American history. The Civil War cost over half a million lives and left one-half of the United States in physical and economic ruin.

More than 150 years later, the United States faces new threats of political violence from disgruntled election losers. Equally troubling, recent polling data finds a rising degree of support for secession among ordinary Americans, especially after their party loses a presidential election. Accordingly, the intense polarization of the 2020s has made the lessons of the Civil War more relevant than ever.

In placing the current democratic crisis in historical context, this article focuses on three questions: First, why did the South reject the results of the 1860 election? Second, what legal and quasi-democratic processes did Confederate states use to assert that most white southerners supported secession? Third, and most important of all, how did American democracy survive the Civil War, the greatest crisis in the nation’s history?
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D121397&title=%E2%80%9CThe%20Dynamics%20of%20Democratic%20Breakdown%3A%20A%20Case%20Study%20of%20the%20American%20Civil%20War%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>

Iowa Contest in the House of Representatives is Over<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=121395>
Posted on March 31, 2021 1:15 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=121395> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

See this statement<https://twitter.com/RitaHartIA/status/1377350159667920901?s=20>.

I never understood why Democrats, if they believed they had a good argument for overturning the results on constitutional grounds, did not try a court challenge. I’d appreciate hearing any inside information on that calculation.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D121395&title=Iowa%20Contest%20in%20the%20House%20of%20Representatives%20is%20Over>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>

“Texas court to hear appeal from woman sentenced to prison for voting while ineligible”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=121393>
Posted on March 31, 2021 9:26 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=121393> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Sam Levine<https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/mar/31/texas-court-appeal-crystal-mason-prison-voting-ineligible> in The Guardian:

Texas’ highest criminal appeals court said Wednesday it would hear an appeal from a Texas<https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/texas> woman who was sentenced to five years in prison for voting while inadvertently ineligible in 2016.

The case has attracted national attention<https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/aug/27/crime-of-voting-texas-woman-crystal-mason-five-years-prison> because of the severity of the sentence and the woman, Crystal Mason, said she did not know she was ineligible to vote at the time.

Mason was serving on supervised release – which is similar to probation – for a federal felony conviction at the time, and Texas prohibits people with felony convictions from voting until they have completed their sentences entirely.

Officials overseeing Mason’s supervised release testified at her trial that they never informed her she was ineligible to vote.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D121393&title=%E2%80%9CTexas%20court%20to%20hear%20appeal%20from%20woman%20sentenced%20to%20prison%20for%20voting%20while%20ineligible%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>

--
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
rhasen at law.uci.edu<mailto:rhasen at law.uci.edu>
http://www.law.uci.edu/faculty/full-time/hasen/
http://electionlawblog.org<http://electionlawblog.org/>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20210401/ab0ab95e/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 2021 bytes
Desc: image001.png
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20210401/ab0ab95e/attachment.png>