Supreme Court Allows Texas to Go Ahead With Strict Voter ID Law

Story here. Don't talk to me right now, SCOTUS.

Federal Court Hearing Arguments in Texas Voter ID Case

Arguments over the legality of Texas' notorious ID law are being heard by a Federal judge in Corpus Christi.

What's super interesting about this case is that the law was originally rejected during preclearance but with preclearance effectively off the table the Justice Department will argue its case by proving that the law intentionally disenfranchises minority voters. (This, by the way, is emblematic of the shift in burden of proof in an post- Shelby County v. Holder world.) It is worth noting that under still intact Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, a law is prohibited if it has the effect of discriminating against voters on the the basis of race. However, the Justice Department seeks to meet a stricter standard and prove that the law was enacted with the intent to discriminate. As you may remember, it was the formula used to determine which jurisdictions were covered and not preclearance itself that was stuck down in Shelby County v. Holder. If the DOJ can prove intent to discriminate then the federal judge can place Texas back under preclearance.

My favorite quote from a New York Times article on the case, "Texas alleg[es] that the Justice Department has gone after “only Southern, Republican-led states” and suggesting that the agency ignores the concerns of white Republican voters and favors minority Democratic voters. The allegations have outraged lawyers for the Justice Department and several minority groups, voters and Democratic lawmakers who are part of the agency’s lawsuit against Texas." Man white Republicans just can't catch a break in the disenfranchisement game.

Today In Voter Suppression: Eric Holder Takes On Ohio and Wisconsin

Wall Street Journal:

"The Obama administration filed court papers Wednesday challenging Republican-backed election laws in Ohio and Wisconsin, as the legal fights over voting rights spread beyond traditional Southern borders.

In Wisconsin, the Justice Department filed a brief supporting a previous federal court ruling against the state's photo identification requirement, which was deemed unfair to minority voters. In Ohio, the Justice Department weighed in against a law limiting early voting and same day registration."

Read the rest here.

EASY Voting Act

H.R.5144 or the Equal Access to Support Youth Voting Act (EASY Voting Act)

"A Bill To amend the Help America Vote Act of 2002 to require States which require individuals to present a photo identification as a condition of voting in elections for Federal office to accept a photo identification presented by a student which is issued by the school the student attends." Basically it says if a state is going to require voter ID, that state has to accept official school issued student IDs. Because congress only has jurisdiction in federal elections, those are the only elections in which the bill would apply.

Good show, Congresspeople Cleaver,Cohen,Schiff, Jackson Lee, and Pocan who sponsored the bill.Of course as this op-ed points out, just because it makes sense and enfranchises voters doesn't mean it's going to pass. What a world we live in.