SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
In Return Towards Justice, Court Rules Texas Voter ID Law 'Discriminatory'
Decision, however, falls short of broad injunction against the voter suppression rule
Aug 05, 2015
A federal appeals court ruled Wednesday that Texas's controversial voter ID law, the most severe in the country, has a "discriminatory effect" against minority voters, in what civil rights campaigners say is an important step towards justice for African-American, Latino, and low-income people suppressed under the rule.
The three judge panel determined that the law, passed by the state in 2011, violates what's left of the Voting Rights Act after it was gutted by the Supreme Court in 2013. The ruling itself comes just one day before the 50th anniversary of the Act, which was the product of the mass organizing and protests of the civil rights and black freedom movements.
"We recognize the charged nature of accusations of racism, particularly against a legislative body, but we also recognize the sad truth that racism continues to exist in our modern American society despite years of laws designed to eradicate it," wrote the three-judge panel for the New Orleans court, which is known for being conservative.
The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals' decision, however, fell short of issuing a broad injunction against the 2011 law, instead determining that it must be sent to a lower district court to find an appropriate remedy. It was not immediately clear whether the state will continue to enforce the rule in the meantime.
This is not the first time a judge has ruled against the law. In 2014, U.S. District Judge Nelva Gonzoles Ramos overturned the rule on the grounds that it has "an impermissible discriminatory effect against Hispanics and African-Americans" and compared it to a poll tax. She noted that voter suppression under the law was vast, with over 600,000 registered voters in Texas lacking the required documentation.
However, Texas successfully appealed this ruling, and the law was in effect during the November 2014 election, thereby disenfranchising large numbers of voters. Wednesday's decision is a blow against the 2011 rule but falls short of the Ramos ruling.
Nonetheless, civil rights groups were buoyed by the development.
"We are greatly encouraged by today's decision," declared Gary Bledsoe, president of the Texas NAACP and an attorney with PotterBledsoe, in a press statement. "This decision acknowledges the problems Texas African American and Latino voters have experienced as cited by their leaders since the law was first implemented, that it blatantly discriminates against minority voters."
"We call upon the Attorney General to stop these efforts and not seek a rehearing or an appeal to the United States Supreme Court," Bledsoe continued. "There is no need to prolong discriminatory practices that truly are hurting Texans of color."
"The Texas Legislature was determined to adopt the most restrictive photo identification law in the country, and it rejected repeated opportunities to reduce the law's negative effects," declared Ezra Rosenberg, co-director of the Voting Rights Project. "It should come as no surprise that the court found a violation of federal law."
Wednesday's decision has broad implications for other voter suppression laws across the country. According to the Brennan Center for Justice, "Since the 2010 election, 21 states have new laws in place making it harder to vote, and 15 states will have new rules in effect for the first time in a presidential election in 2016."
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
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 |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Sarah Lazare
Sarah Lazare is the editor of Workday Magazine and a contributing editor for In These Times. She is a former Staff Writer at Common Dreams. She comes from a background in independent journalism for publications including The Intercept, The Nation, and Tom Dispatch.
A federal appeals court ruled Wednesday that Texas's controversial voter ID law, the most severe in the country, has a "discriminatory effect" against minority voters, in what civil rights campaigners say is an important step towards justice for African-American, Latino, and low-income people suppressed under the rule.
The three judge panel determined that the law, passed by the state in 2011, violates what's left of the Voting Rights Act after it was gutted by the Supreme Court in 2013. The ruling itself comes just one day before the 50th anniversary of the Act, which was the product of the mass organizing and protests of the civil rights and black freedom movements.
"We recognize the charged nature of accusations of racism, particularly against a legislative body, but we also recognize the sad truth that racism continues to exist in our modern American society despite years of laws designed to eradicate it," wrote the three-judge panel for the New Orleans court, which is known for being conservative.
The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals' decision, however, fell short of issuing a broad injunction against the 2011 law, instead determining that it must be sent to a lower district court to find an appropriate remedy. It was not immediately clear whether the state will continue to enforce the rule in the meantime.
This is not the first time a judge has ruled against the law. In 2014, U.S. District Judge Nelva Gonzoles Ramos overturned the rule on the grounds that it has "an impermissible discriminatory effect against Hispanics and African-Americans" and compared it to a poll tax. She noted that voter suppression under the law was vast, with over 600,000 registered voters in Texas lacking the required documentation.
However, Texas successfully appealed this ruling, and the law was in effect during the November 2014 election, thereby disenfranchising large numbers of voters. Wednesday's decision is a blow against the 2011 rule but falls short of the Ramos ruling.
Nonetheless, civil rights groups were buoyed by the development.
"We are greatly encouraged by today's decision," declared Gary Bledsoe, president of the Texas NAACP and an attorney with PotterBledsoe, in a press statement. "This decision acknowledges the problems Texas African American and Latino voters have experienced as cited by their leaders since the law was first implemented, that it blatantly discriminates against minority voters."
"We call upon the Attorney General to stop these efforts and not seek a rehearing or an appeal to the United States Supreme Court," Bledsoe continued. "There is no need to prolong discriminatory practices that truly are hurting Texans of color."
"The Texas Legislature was determined to adopt the most restrictive photo identification law in the country, and it rejected repeated opportunities to reduce the law's negative effects," declared Ezra Rosenberg, co-director of the Voting Rights Project. "It should come as no surprise that the court found a violation of federal law."
Wednesday's decision has broad implications for other voter suppression laws across the country. According to the Brennan Center for Justice, "Since the 2010 election, 21 states have new laws in place making it harder to vote, and 15 states will have new rules in effect for the first time in a presidential election in 2016."
Sarah Lazare
Sarah Lazare is the editor of Workday Magazine and a contributing editor for In These Times. She is a former Staff Writer at Common Dreams. She comes from a background in independent journalism for publications including The Intercept, The Nation, and Tom Dispatch.
A federal appeals court ruled Wednesday that Texas's controversial voter ID law, the most severe in the country, has a "discriminatory effect" against minority voters, in what civil rights campaigners say is an important step towards justice for African-American, Latino, and low-income people suppressed under the rule.
The three judge panel determined that the law, passed by the state in 2011, violates what's left of the Voting Rights Act after it was gutted by the Supreme Court in 2013. The ruling itself comes just one day before the 50th anniversary of the Act, which was the product of the mass organizing and protests of the civil rights and black freedom movements.
"We recognize the charged nature of accusations of racism, particularly against a legislative body, but we also recognize the sad truth that racism continues to exist in our modern American society despite years of laws designed to eradicate it," wrote the three-judge panel for the New Orleans court, which is known for being conservative.
The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals' decision, however, fell short of issuing a broad injunction against the 2011 law, instead determining that it must be sent to a lower district court to find an appropriate remedy. It was not immediately clear whether the state will continue to enforce the rule in the meantime.
This is not the first time a judge has ruled against the law. In 2014, U.S. District Judge Nelva Gonzoles Ramos overturned the rule on the grounds that it has "an impermissible discriminatory effect against Hispanics and African-Americans" and compared it to a poll tax. She noted that voter suppression under the law was vast, with over 600,000 registered voters in Texas lacking the required documentation.
However, Texas successfully appealed this ruling, and the law was in effect during the November 2014 election, thereby disenfranchising large numbers of voters. Wednesday's decision is a blow against the 2011 rule but falls short of the Ramos ruling.
Nonetheless, civil rights groups were buoyed by the development.
"We are greatly encouraged by today's decision," declared Gary Bledsoe, president of the Texas NAACP and an attorney with PotterBledsoe, in a press statement. "This decision acknowledges the problems Texas African American and Latino voters have experienced as cited by their leaders since the law was first implemented, that it blatantly discriminates against minority voters."
"We call upon the Attorney General to stop these efforts and not seek a rehearing or an appeal to the United States Supreme Court," Bledsoe continued. "There is no need to prolong discriminatory practices that truly are hurting Texans of color."
"The Texas Legislature was determined to adopt the most restrictive photo identification law in the country, and it rejected repeated opportunities to reduce the law's negative effects," declared Ezra Rosenberg, co-director of the Voting Rights Project. "It should come as no surprise that the court found a violation of federal law."
Wednesday's decision has broad implications for other voter suppression laws across the country. According to the Brennan Center for Justice, "Since the 2010 election, 21 states have new laws in place making it harder to vote, and 15 states will have new rules in effect for the first time in a presidential election in 2016."
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.