

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
The U.S. Supreme Court on Saturday said that Texas's controversial voter ID law can remain in place for this year's election, potentially threatening voting rights of hundreds of thousands of Texans.
U.S. District Judge Nelva Gonzales Ramos had struck down the law on Oct. 9, finding that it "has an impermissible discriminatory effect against Hispanics and African-Americans, [...] was imposed with an unconstitutional discriminatory purpose," and "constitutes an unconstitutional poll tax." Days later, a federal appeals court blocked that decision, keeping the voter ID restrictions in place.
The Supreme Court's early morning decision rejects an emergency appeal brought forth by voting rights advocates to reinstate the district court's injunction.
Justice Ginsburg, who was joined by Justices Sotomayor and Kagan in dissenting, wrote: "The greatest threat to public confidence in elections in this case is the prospect of enforcing a purposefully discriminatory law, one that likely imposes an unconstitutional poll tax and risks denying the right to vote to hundreds of thousands of eligible voters."
Lyle Denniston writes at Scotusblog that the decision is "a stinging defeat for the Obama administration and a number of civil rights groups." He adds: "This apparently was the first time since 1982 that the Court has allowed a law restricting voters' rights to be enforced after a federal court had ruled it to be unconstitutional."
"The right to vote is the cornerstone of our democracy, and it must be protected," Representative Trey Martinez Fischer, Chairman of Mexican American Legislative Caucus of the Texas House of Representatives (MALC), said in a press statement following the decision.
"The courts are supposed to protect voters against discrimination and disenfranchisement, but the Supreme Court got this one wrong. This ruling is a loss for democracy, as it will make it harder for hundreds of thousands of minorities to vote this November," he stated.
The Brennan Center for Justice criticized the Court's decision as well, stating that it "demonstrates the inadequacy of existing protections against discrimination at the voting booth."
"A court of law found that Texas' photo ID was enacted with intentional discrimination against minority voters, and yet that discrimination is being allowed to infect the November elections," stated Myrna Perez, deputy director of the Democracy Program at the Brennan Center for Justice. "That cannot stand. We clearly need new laws and protections to ensure our elections are free, fair, and accessible."
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
The U.S. Supreme Court on Saturday said that Texas's controversial voter ID law can remain in place for this year's election, potentially threatening voting rights of hundreds of thousands of Texans.
U.S. District Judge Nelva Gonzales Ramos had struck down the law on Oct. 9, finding that it "has an impermissible discriminatory effect against Hispanics and African-Americans, [...] was imposed with an unconstitutional discriminatory purpose," and "constitutes an unconstitutional poll tax." Days later, a federal appeals court blocked that decision, keeping the voter ID restrictions in place.
The Supreme Court's early morning decision rejects an emergency appeal brought forth by voting rights advocates to reinstate the district court's injunction.
Justice Ginsburg, who was joined by Justices Sotomayor and Kagan in dissenting, wrote: "The greatest threat to public confidence in elections in this case is the prospect of enforcing a purposefully discriminatory law, one that likely imposes an unconstitutional poll tax and risks denying the right to vote to hundreds of thousands of eligible voters."
Lyle Denniston writes at Scotusblog that the decision is "a stinging defeat for the Obama administration and a number of civil rights groups." He adds: "This apparently was the first time since 1982 that the Court has allowed a law restricting voters' rights to be enforced after a federal court had ruled it to be unconstitutional."
"The right to vote is the cornerstone of our democracy, and it must be protected," Representative Trey Martinez Fischer, Chairman of Mexican American Legislative Caucus of the Texas House of Representatives (MALC), said in a press statement following the decision.
"The courts are supposed to protect voters against discrimination and disenfranchisement, but the Supreme Court got this one wrong. This ruling is a loss for democracy, as it will make it harder for hundreds of thousands of minorities to vote this November," he stated.
The Brennan Center for Justice criticized the Court's decision as well, stating that it "demonstrates the inadequacy of existing protections against discrimination at the voting booth."
"A court of law found that Texas' photo ID was enacted with intentional discrimination against minority voters, and yet that discrimination is being allowed to infect the November elections," stated Myrna Perez, deputy director of the Democracy Program at the Brennan Center for Justice. "That cannot stand. We clearly need new laws and protections to ensure our elections are free, fair, and accessible."
The U.S. Supreme Court on Saturday said that Texas's controversial voter ID law can remain in place for this year's election, potentially threatening voting rights of hundreds of thousands of Texans.
U.S. District Judge Nelva Gonzales Ramos had struck down the law on Oct. 9, finding that it "has an impermissible discriminatory effect against Hispanics and African-Americans, [...] was imposed with an unconstitutional discriminatory purpose," and "constitutes an unconstitutional poll tax." Days later, a federal appeals court blocked that decision, keeping the voter ID restrictions in place.
The Supreme Court's early morning decision rejects an emergency appeal brought forth by voting rights advocates to reinstate the district court's injunction.
Justice Ginsburg, who was joined by Justices Sotomayor and Kagan in dissenting, wrote: "The greatest threat to public confidence in elections in this case is the prospect of enforcing a purposefully discriminatory law, one that likely imposes an unconstitutional poll tax and risks denying the right to vote to hundreds of thousands of eligible voters."
Lyle Denniston writes at Scotusblog that the decision is "a stinging defeat for the Obama administration and a number of civil rights groups." He adds: "This apparently was the first time since 1982 that the Court has allowed a law restricting voters' rights to be enforced after a federal court had ruled it to be unconstitutional."
"The right to vote is the cornerstone of our democracy, and it must be protected," Representative Trey Martinez Fischer, Chairman of Mexican American Legislative Caucus of the Texas House of Representatives (MALC), said in a press statement following the decision.
"The courts are supposed to protect voters against discrimination and disenfranchisement, but the Supreme Court got this one wrong. This ruling is a loss for democracy, as it will make it harder for hundreds of thousands of minorities to vote this November," he stated.
The Brennan Center for Justice criticized the Court's decision as well, stating that it "demonstrates the inadequacy of existing protections against discrimination at the voting booth."
"A court of law found that Texas' photo ID was enacted with intentional discrimination against minority voters, and yet that discrimination is being allowed to infect the November elections," stated Myrna Perez, deputy director of the Democracy Program at the Brennan Center for Justice. "That cannot stand. We clearly need new laws and protections to ensure our elections are free, fair, and accessible."