February, 10 2017, 01:30pm EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Email:,press@lawyerscommittee.org
Voting Advocates Announce a Settlement of "Exact Match" Lawsuit in Georgia
Minor Typos and Data Entry Errors will No Longer Deny Eligible Georgians the Right to Register and Vote
WASHINGTON
The Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, Project Vote, Campaign Legal Center, Voting Rights Institute at the Georgetown University Law Center, along with the New York City office of Hughes Hubbard & Reed LLP and Atlanta-based firm of Caplan Cobb LLP, acting as pro bono counsel, announced a settlement today in a lawsuit filed on behalf Asian Americans Advancing Justice - Atlanta, the Georgia Coalition for the Peoples' Agenda and the Georgia State Conference of the NAACP, which challenged Georgia's exact-match voter registration verification scheme. The suit alleged Georgia's "exact match" system violated Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and deprived eligible Georgians of their fundamental right to vote under the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, and resulted in Georgia restoring more than 42,000 previously purged voters to the rolls.
"This important victory ensures that tens of thousands of voters will not be disenfranchised by Georgia's "no match, no vote" policy, which unnecessarily denied people the opportunity to register to vote," said Kristen Clarke, president and executive director of the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law. "We will continue to fight ongoing voting discrimination and barriers to the ballot box. Now is the time for focus on policies that can help make voting easier in Georgia and across the nation."
The complaint, which was filed in September 2016 in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, concerned Georgia's voter registration verification process. Since 2010, Georgia required all of the letters and numbers in the applicant's name, date of birth, driver's license number or last four digits of the Social Security number to exactly match the information in the state's Department of Drivers Service (DDS) or Social Security Administration (SSA) databases. If even a single letter, number, hyphen, space, or apostrophe did not exactly match the database information, and the applicant failed to correct the mismatch within 40 days, the application was automatically rejected and the applicant was not placed on the registration rolls - even if they were eligible to vote.
This flawed process led to the cancellation of tens of thousands of applications from eligible applicants, with African American, Latino, and Asian American applicants being rejected at rates significantly higher than White applicants. For example, of the approximately 34,874 voter registration applicants whose applications were cancelled between July 2013 and July 15, 2016, approximately 22,189 (63.6 percent) identified as Black, 2,752 (7.9 percent) identified as Latino, 1,665 (4.8 percent) identified as Asian-American, and 4,748 (13.6 percent) identified as White.
Under the terms of the settlement agreement, the Secretary of State agreed to implement reforms to help ensure that eligible Georgians will no longer be denied the right to register and vote as a result of data entry errors, typos and other database matching issues that do not bear upon the applicant's eligibility to vote. Some of the reforms agreed to by the Secretary of State pursuant to the terms of the settlement include:
- Georgia will no longer automatically cancel voter registration applications where the information on the application fails to exactly match the applicant's data on the Georgia Department of Drivers Services (DDS) or Social Security Administration (SSA) databases;
- If the data on a voter registration application fails to exactly match data on the DDS or SSA databases, applicants will be added to the rolls as "pending," with no deadline to correct the mismatch;
- Such registrants will be able to present their Georgia driver's license, State ID card or other forms of appropriate ID at the polling place and be able to cast a ballot;
- In cases where the applicant is a U.S. citizen, but the DDS database contains an error or out of date information showing the applicant is not a citizen, those individuals will be able to show proof of their citizenship -up to and including on Election Day - to complete the registration process and cast a ballot.
- The full details are set forth in the attached Settlement Agreement.
These reforms, which were partly implemented before the November 8, 2016 general election, gave more than 42,000 previously disqualified applicants, who were otherwise eligible to vote, an opportunity to complete the registration process and cast a ballot.
The settlement will also result in giving thousands of additional applicants whose applications were rejected as a result of the "exact match" system between October 1, 2013 and October 1, 2014 the opportunity to now finalize their voter registration and be able to cast ballots in this year's elections and elections in the future.
"Asian Americans are the fastest growing immigrant population in Georgia. Our communities are naturalizing in increasing numbers, and we will continue to see more New Americans exercise their right to vote," said Stephanie Cho, executive director, Asian Americans Advancing Justice - Atlanta. "We are pleased that this decision increases access to voting for immigrants and people of color."
"The fundamental right to vote should never hinge on data entry errors and technicalities. Our systems can and must do better," said Danielle Lang, deputy director of Voting Rights at the Campaign Legal Center. "Thanks to this settlement, and our partners who led this effort, tens of thousands of eligible Georgia voters will be restored to the rolls."
"This settlement is an important recognition that as sacred as the vote may be in democracy; the vote cannot protect itself," said Francys Johnson, Georgia NAACP President. "This is not the work of government alone. It takes a vigilance from engaged citizens to protect and defend our fundamental values. These reforms at the heart of this settlement are strong indications that our democracy works."
"This case illustrates the importance of careful, sensible registration procedures," said Michelle Kanter Cohen, election counsel for Project Vote. "No American citizen should be denied their fundamental right to vote because of discriminatory practices or bureaucratic mistakes."
"This settlement brings an end to Georgia's onerous exact match requirement and instills important protections for voters in our state," said Helen Butler, executive director of the Georgia Coalition for the Peoples' Agenda. "Voters deserve an election system that enables participation, not one that creates barriers and forces voters to jump through unnecessary hoops."
The Lawyers' Committee is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization, formed in 1963 at the request of President John F. Kennedy to enlist the private bar's leadership and resources in combating racial discrimination and the resulting inequality of opportunity - work that continues to be vital today.
(202) 662-8600LATEST NEWS
Trump to Big Oil Execs: Give Me $1 Billion and I'll Help You Wreck the Planet
"You won't read a more important story today," said one commentator. "Trump is willing to literally destroy the planet for $1 billion."
May 09, 2024
Presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump made a straightforward offer to some of the top fossil fuel executives in the United States during a dinner at his Mar-a-Lago club last month, which marked the hottest April on record.
According to new reporting, Trump pledged to swiftly gut climate regulations put in place by the Biden administration if the oil and gas industry raises $1 billion for his 2024 presidential campaign.
The "remarkably blunt and transactional pitch," reported by The Washington Post, was Trump's latest explicit statement of his intention to give the fossil fuel industry free rein to wreck the planet if he wins a second term in power. Executives from Exxon, Chevron, Occidental Petroleum, and other prominent fossil fuel companies reportedly attended the Mar-a-Lago dinner.
Late last year, Trump said he would be a dictator on the first day of his second term, vowing to use his executive authority to "close the border" and "drill, drill, drill" for the fossil fuels that are driving global temperatures to catastrophic extremes and imperiling hopes for a livable future.
The Post reported Thursday that Trump said a $1 billion investment in his run against Democratic President Joe Biden would be a "deal" for Big Oil "because of the taxation and regulation they would avoid thanks to him."
"The contrast between the two candidates on climate policy could not be more stark," the Post noted. "Biden has called global warming an 'existential threat' and over the last three years, his administration has finalized 100 new environmental regulations aimed at cutting air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions, restricting toxic chemicals, and conserving public lands and waters. In comparison, Trump has called climate change a 'hoax,' and his administration weakened or wiped out more than 125 environmental rules and policies over four years."
Will Bunch, a columnist for The Philadelphia Inquirer, wrote in response to the Post's reporting that "you won't read a more important story today."
"Trump is willing to literally destroy the planet for $1 billion," Bunch added.
"Republicans want to sell you out to Big Oil to line their pockets."
In recent months, Trump and his allies have laid out how they intend to resume and accelerate that destructive deregulatory blitz if the former president wins another term in November.
Project 2025, a coalition of dozens of right-wing organizations including the Heritage Foundation, crafted a detailed presidential transition guide that calls for a dramatic expansion of U.S. fossil fuel infrastructure, aggressive rollbacks of climate rules, and steep cuts to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Meanwhile, as Politicoreported Wednesday, fossil fuel industry lawyers and lobbyists are in the process of "drawing up ready-to-sign executive orders for Donald Trump aimed at pushing natural gas exports, cutting drilling costs, and increasing offshore oil leases in case he wins a second term."
"Six energy industry lawyers and lobbyists interviewed by Politico described the effort to craft executive orders and other policy paperwork that they see as more effective than anything a second Trump administration could devise on its own," the outlet noted. "Those include a quick reversal of Biden's pause on new natural gas export permits and preparations for wider and cheaper access to federal lands and waters for drilling."
A
recent study estimated that a Trump victory in 2024 could result in an additional 4 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent emissions by the end of the decade, inflicting more than $900 billion in global climate damages.
So far, the fossil fuel industry and their allies have donated more than $6.4 million to Trump's joint fundraising committee in the first three months of 2024, the Post noted Thursday, citing an analysis by Climate Power.
The Texas Tribunereported earlier this week that the oil and gas sector "has contributed more than $25 million to the GOP and conservative groups compared to $3.6 million to Democrats" thus far in the 2024 election cycle.
Harold Hamm, a billionaire oil tycoon, is planning to hold a fundraiser for Trump's reelection bid later this year, according to the
Post.
Citing the Post's reporting, Rep. Bill Pascrell, Jr. (D-N.J.) said Thursday that Trump "demanded a straight-up billion-dollar bribe from oil executives."
"Republicans want to sell you out to Big Oil to line their pockets," said Pascrell.
Keep ReadingShow Less
In First, Vermont Ready to Make Fossil Fuel Giants Pay for Climate Damage
"If you contributed to a mess, you should play a role in cleaning it up," said one supporter of a bill that could be a model for other states to follow.
May 09, 2024
Offering a model for others to follow, Vermont this week became the first state in the nation to pass legislation that would require fossil fuel giants to pay for the damage and disruption caused by their planet-warming products.
While it remains likely Republican Gov. Phil Scott will veto the bill passed by the state Senate in March and the House on Monday, the legislation—now heading for his desk—was celebrated as a blueprint for others to imitate.
As Vermont Publicreported:
Modeled after the federal Superfund program, the policy would require companies like ExxonMobil Corporation and Shell to pay Vermont a share of what climate change has cost the state in recent decades. Vermont would use those payments to establish a program to fund recovery from climate-fueled disasters and work to adapt to the state’s already-changed climate.
Vermont could become the first state in the country to enact such legislation. New York, California, Massachusetts and Maryland are all considering similar bills, as is Congress.
The fossil fuel industry has opposed the measure and vowed legal action if it becomes law. In March, the American Petroleum Institute (API), which represents oil and gas companies, called the legislation "bad policy" and argued that it "may be unconstitutional" for holding corporations responsible for what society at large has done.
Evidence has shown, however, that the fossil fuel industry knew about the climate impacts of burning coal, oil, and gas for decades, but hid those understandings from the public as it fought efforts to curb emissions or mitigate the damage being done.
"If you contributed to a mess, you should play a role in cleaning it up," Elena Mihaly, vice-president of the Conservation Law Foundation's Vermont chapter and a supporter of the bill, toldThe Guardian.
Like many other states, Vermont has suffered expensive damage from climate-related weather events in recent years—costs that proponents of the bill say should not be shouldered by the state alone when it's so clear the role that the fossil fuel industry has played to create the current crisis.
"You see towns across the state underwater, and communities and businesses financially devastated. The reality of the climate crisis just really comes crashing home," Ben Edgerly Walsh, climate and energy program director for the Vermont Public Interest Research Group, toldNBC News following passage in the House. "These are facts that we are dealing with in real time that we need the financial resources to deal with."
If Scott vetoes the bill, lawmakers in the state House and Senate would both have to muster a two-thirds majority to override his rejection.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Republicans Funded by Arms Industry Fume Over Biden Threat to Withhold Bombs From Israel
"What did we do after we were attacked in Pearl Harbor?" asked Sen. Lindsey Graham. "We dropped two nuclear weapons on two Japanese cities."
May 09, 2024
Congressional Republicans funded by the arms industry lashed out Wednesday over U.S. President Joe Biden's belated threat to withhold American weaponry from Israel if it launches a full-scale ground invasion of the Gaza city of Rafah, which is currently facing a humanitarian nightmare.
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), who received hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign donations from pro-Israel interests and the weapons industry during his 2020 reelection campaign, declared that Biden's threat "put our friends in Israel in a box."
"What did we do after we were attacked in Pearl Harbor?" Graham, who previously encouraged Israel to "level" Gaza, said in a Fox News appearance late Wednesday. "We dropped two nuclear weapons on two Japanese cities... What is Joe Biden doing? He's making it impossible for allies throughout the world to trust us, he's making it hard on Israel to win."
Lindsey Graham: What do we do after we were attacked in Pearl Harbor? We dropped nuclear weapons on Japanese cities pic.twitter.com/kh7RU4flDw
— Acyn (@Acyn) May 9, 2024
Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) echoed Graham, falsely claiming that Biden has "imposed an arms embargo on Israel" and endorsed "a Hamas victory against Israel." Lockheed Martin, one of the world's biggest weapons manufacturers and a major beneficiary of Israel's war on Gaza, was the fourth-largest contributor to Cotton's campaign committee in 2020, the last time the senator ran for reelection.
The notion that Biden's threat to withhold future weapons deliveries to Israel undercuts the country's ability to assail Gaza was contradicted by a U.S. official who toldThe Washington Post that "the Israeli military has enough weapons supplied by the U.S. and other partners to conduct the Rafah operation if it chooses to cast aside U.S. objections."
Earlier this week, numerous media outlets reported that the Biden administration opted to delay a shipment of thousands of Boeing-made bombs over concerns about Israel's impending assault on Rafah. On Tuesday, Israeli ground forces entered Rafah and seized control of the city's border crossing with Egypt, imperiling humanitarian aid operations there.
Biden, who has approved more than 100 weapons sales to Israel and billions of dollars in additional aid since the October 7 Hamas-led attack, falsely said Wednesday that Israeli forces "haven't gone in Rafah yet," raising questions over the practical implications of his threat to withhold U.S. weapons in the case of a ground invasion.
But Republicans nevertheless fumed over Biden's approach, showing no concern for the humanitarian catastrophe that Israel's military—armed to the teeth with American weapons—has inflicted on Gaza.
In a letter to the president on Wednesday, House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.)—both major recipients of arms industry cash throughout their careers—wrote that delaying weapons deliveries "risks emboldening Israel's enemies and undermining the trust that other allies and partners have in the United States."
Johnson and McConnell, along with most congressional Democrats, supported a sprawling foreign aid package last month that authorized around $17 billion in military assistance for Israel. Reutersreported that Lockheed Martin and RTX—formerly Raytheon—both "stand to profit" from the measure.
Raytheon's PAC donated $18,500 to McConnell's 2020 reelection campaign.
Contrary to the position of congressional Republicans, progressive foreign policy analysts and anti-war organizations said Biden would be adhering to U.S. law if he halts weapons deliveries to Israel. Section 620I of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 prohibits U.S. military assistance to any country that is impeding the provision of American humanitarian aid—something Israel has done repeatedly.
"Enforcing our laws and making clear that the U.S. will not transfer offensive weapons to support a disastrous military operation that endangers millions of Palestinians throughout Gaza is vital," Sara Haghdoosti, executive director of Win Without War, said in a statement Wednesday.
"U.S. law gives the president ample power to ensure that no more U.S. arms go to [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu's brutal war in Gaza," said Haghdoosti. "With a crucial cease-fire deal within reach, added pressure from the Biden administration can help end this war and create a path to a sustainable peace for people in Israel and Palestine. We once again urge the president to use every tool available to him to secure a cease-fire in Gaza and the release of all hostages."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular