October, 12 2018, 12:00am EDT

Civil Rights Groups Sue Georgia Secretary of State Brian Kemp to Cease Discriminatory 'No Match, No Vote' Registration Protocol
Lawsuit filed by the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law and its partners on behalf of Georgia organizations
WASHINGTON
Today, the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law and its partners filed a major lawsuit against Secretary of State Brian Kemp over the state of Georgia's discriminatory and unlawful "exact match" voter suppression scheme. The suit alleges that Georgia's 'no match, no vote' voter registration scheme violates the Voting Rights Act, the National Voter Registration Act, and the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution.
"Georgia Secretary of State Brian Kemp has been a driving force behind multiple voter suppression efforts throughout the years in Georgia," said Kristen Clarke, president and executive director of the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law. "If there is one person in Georgia who knows that the 'Exact Match' scheme has a discriminatory impact on minority voters, it's Brian Kemp because we successfully sued him over a mirror policy in 2016. There exists a stark parallel between the voter suppression schemes levied by states around the country prior to the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and the insidious tactics used by Secretary Kemp to capitalize on the Supreme Court's decision in Shelby County to gut the Act and its protections for African Americans and other people of color that came with it. No less than 70 percent of people impacted by 'Exact Match' are African-American. We will continue fighting voter suppression to ensure a level playing field for voters across Georgia this election cycle."
As a result of the "exact match" voter-registration protocol, which is being implemented by Georgia Secretary of State Brian Kemp, more than 53,000 voter registration applications have been placed in "pending" status one month before the midterm election. The vast majority of those pending applications are from minority voters. The federal lawsuit asks that a court prohibit the purging of any voters based on the 'exact match' protocol and ensure that all ballots cast by voters flagged as 'non-matches' are counted in future elections.
Secretary Kemp has long endorsed and repeatedly used the 'exact match' protocol, which has been previously shown to have a high error rate and a substantial, negative impact upon voting-eligible African American, Latino and Asian American Georgians. The Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law and other civil rights organizations successfully challenged the use of 'no match, no vote' prior to the November 2016 election, resulting in the restoration of more than 40,000 voters to the rolls.
Under the Georgia law, applicants are removed from the registration rolls after 26 months if they do not cure the "no-match" result. The matching protocol delays the processing of complete and accurate voter registration applications and will cause many to be rejected after the 26-month window passes, resulting in the disenfranchisement of legitimate, voting-eligible Georgians. The notice provided by election officials is vague and often confused with junk mail, meaning that voters are frequently unaware that there is an issue with their registration status.
Voter registration application is flagged and placed in "pending" status if the information on their registration form does not exactly match information contained in the Department of Driver Services or Social Security Administration databases. A non-match can result from something as simple as an election officials switching two numbers in the applicant's driver's license number, adding or removing a hyphen from a name, or changing a voter's maiden name. The matching process also incorrectly flags U.S. citizens as non-citizens, even where the applicants submit a copy of their U.S. naturalization certificate or other evidence of their U.S. citizenship with their applications.
Nearly every other state treats failure to match a database differently than Georgia. In the case of a mismatch, the voter is still fully registered. First-time voters are required to show a form of identification at the polls when they vote for the first time. This process provides the same amount of election security and imposes less barriers to voters.
"Georgia's 'exact match' protocol has resulted in the cancellation or rejection of tens of thousands of voter registration applications in the past. The reintroduction of this practice, which is known to be discriminatory and error-ridden, is appalling," said Danielle Lang, senior legal counsel, voting rights and redistricting at CLC. "This policy adds nothing to the security of Georgia elections but causes unnecessary confusion and additional burdens for eligible citizens who wish to exercise their fundamental right to vote."
"In 2016, we helped stop Georgia's 'exact match' protocol that kicked thousands of voters off the voter rolls--some of them simply because they have uncommon Asian or Latino names that others commonly misspell," Phi Nguyen Litigation Director, Asian Americans Advancing Justice - Atlanta. "It is unacceptable that only two years later, we are once again asking a court to step in to end an almost identical 'exact match' protocol that threatens to disenfranchise thousands more from our communities."
"I am appalled at the actions of the Secretary of State office; over 70% of the pending applicants are minorities," said Phyllis Blake, President of the Georgia State Conference of the NAACP. "I hope that the Secretary of State's expeditiousness follow up to correct these pending applications, whether the problem exists within the database, SOS office, County Voter Registration office or applicant, find it and fix it to allow the voter to fulfill the precious right to vote. The NAACP, GSC will continue to monitor this situation and request full transparency in yet another GA Voter Suppression Tactic attempt."
"It's a stain on our system of democracy when less than a month before an election which could produce the first African-American female governor in our nation's history, we are seeing this type of voter suppression scheme attempted by a state official whose candidacy for the governorship produces an irremediable conflict of interest," said NAACP President and CEO, Derrick Johnson. "We are closely monitoring this situation with our Georgia State Conference President Phyllis Blake and demanding a complete investigation and full transparency prior to the election."
"The exact match process has a discriminatory impact on minority voters. It creates further barriers for U. S. citizens attempting to exercise their right to vote," said Jerry Gonzalez, Executive Director of Georgia Association of Latino Elected Officials (GALEO). "We do hope the court will step in and allow these voters the right to vote while striking down this discriminatory process.
"The right to vote is central to our democracy," said Villa Hayes, Senior Pro Bono Counsel at Hughes Hubbard & Reed. "Democracy works best when all citizens can vote and we are proud to be an active participant in voter protection."
"The Exact Match law continues to be a tool of voter suppression. Every year, thousands of Georgians are denied their right to vote due to clerical/administrative errors," said Tamieka Atkins, Executive Director for Pro Georgia. "This year, 53,000 people are being negatively affected. If you are on the pending list, you can still vote. You must show photo identification at the polls that closely resembles the name you used to register to vote. If you're not sure if you're on the pending list, visit mvp.sos.ga.gov to check your status or call ProGeorgia at 4045833871 and we can assist you."
On July 18, 2018, voting rights advocates sent a notice letter to Georgia Secretary of State Brian Kemp, advising him that the enactment and implementation of the voter registration provisions of Georgia Act 250 (O.C.G.A. SS 21-2-220.1), which codified a 'no match, no vote' voter registration protocol, violate Section 8 of the National Voter Registration Act, and requesting that Secretary Kemp immediately cease enforcement of the Georgia law or risk facing a new legal challenge to the law in federal court.
Given recent news reports, it is important to note that many voters on this "pending" list for "exact match" issues are entitled to vote a regular ballot in person at the polls if they show Georgia voter photo ID. It is possible, however, that some may have to present proof of citizenship to a deputy registrar and that others will not be able to vote by mail or may have their vote by mail ballots rejected because Georgia absentee ballots do not require photo ID. Voters with questions can call Election Protection at 866-OUR-VOTE.
The Lawyer's Committee for Civil Rights Under Law filed its lawsuit today along with its partners including Campaign Legal Center, Hughes Hubbard & Reed LLP, Asian Americans Advancing Justice - Atlanta and the Law Office of Bryan Sells. The suit was filed on behalf of the Georgia State Conference of the NAACP, the Georgia Coalition for the Peoples' Agenda, Asian Americans Advancing Justice - Atlanta, ProGeorgia State Table, Georgia Association of Latino Elected Officials, and the New Georgia Project.
To read the full complaint, click here
About the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law: The Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization, was formed in 1963 at the request of President John F. Kennedy to involve the private bar in providing legal services to address racial discrimination. Now in its 55th year, the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law is continuing its quest "Move America Toward Justice." The principal mission of the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law is to secure, through the rule of law, equal justice for all, particularly in the areas of criminal justice, fair housing and community development, economic justice, educational opportunities, and voting rights. For more information, please visit https://lawyerscommittee.org
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
Markey, Bowman Unveil $1.6 Trillion Green New Deal for Public Schools
"Let's build a green future where every student can learn and thrive," said Sen. Ed Markey while introducing the proposed legislation.
Sep 28, 2023
Climate and education advocates on Thursday cheered the introduction in the U.S. Congress by Sen. Ed Markey and Rep. Jamaal Bowman of the Green New Deal for Public Schools Act, which the lawmakers said would invest $1.6 trillion to transform the nation's education system while "creating 1.3 million jobs and eliminating 78 million metric tons of carbon emissions over 10 years."
A statement promoting the proposed legislation says it would "fund green upgrades that remove all health harms and carbon pollution fromevery public school in the nation while taking on environmental and racial inequities."
"It will unleash the potential of safe and inspiring public education for 50 million K-12 students in every neighborhood across the country," the statement added. "And, it willadd essential staff to vulnerable schools, create 1.3 million good-paying jobs annually, and reduce carbon emissions by 78 millionmetric tons each year—that's the same as taking 17 million gas-powered cars off the road!"
The measure is currently co-sponsored by 74 House lawmakers and is endorsed by advocacy groups including the Sunrise Movement; American Federation of Teachers; Gen Z for Change; Working Families Party; Sierra Club; Institute for Policy Studies; GreenLatinos; March for Our Lives; Progressive Democrats of America; and the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees.
"The United States of America should have the best public education system in the world—our students, parents, teachers, staff, and administrators are doing their part, but Congress is failing them at every turn," Markey (D-Mass.) said in a statement. "School buildings are falling apart, educators and staff are creating makeshift air conditioners from window units, aging infrastructure is making our kids and our planet sick—it's a disgrace."
"The Green New Deal for Public Schools Act delivers climate justice, health justice, social justice, economic justice, and racial justice so that students—no matter their zip code—can learn in a safe and healthy environment, and one that is contributing to a healthier planet for the next generation," Markey added. "It is long past due for the United States to invest in schools what schools invest in us."
Bowman (D-N.Y.)—the founder and former principal of the Cornerstone Academy for Social Action, a public middle school in the Bronx—said that "it's time to revolutionize our public schools."
"As we face the devastating impacts of the climate crisis and confront the harms of underinvestment in redlined communities and inequities in our education system, we must center our kids and their futures," he asserted. "Education can change the world."
Bowman continued:
Schools should be the centers of our communities, places of joy and self-discovery where students feel safe to grow, thrive, and explore their passions and curiosity. Right now, they're crumbling, leaving our students, educators, and communities behind. We must take advantage of this moment by putting them first and facing the climate crisis head-on with bold investments in our schools focused on environmental, educational, economic, and racial equity.
"It's time for us to provide our kids with the resources they need to unlock their brilliance and have a livable planet by passing the Green New Deal for Public Schools Act and making urgent and necessary investments to revitalize our public education system," Bowman added.
The proposed legislation comes three days after students at more than 50 high schools across the U.S.—led by the Sunrise Movement—launched the Green New Deals for Schools campaign. The campaign is demanding that education officials provide school buildings powered by renewable energy; free, healthy, local, and sustainable meals; support for finding well-paying, unionized green careers; plans for extreme weather events; and instruction about the climate crisis.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Biden Administration's New Offshore Drilling Plan Decried as 'Climate Nightmare'
"President Biden says that climate change is an existential threat," said one campaigner. "Unfortunately, this decision is yet another sign that his administration is not willing to take actions that would match that rhetoric."
Sep 28, 2023
Climate and environmental defenders on Thursday condemned the Biden administration's imminent plan to sell offshore oil and gas drilling rights in the Gulf of Mexico over the next five years.
Bloombergreported Deputy Interior Secretary Tommy Beaudreau told a Senate panel on Thursday that the Biden administration's five-year offshore drilling rights plan will be released on Friday. Beaudreau said the plan was "definitely informed" by the Inflation Reduction Actction Act, which–while allocating hundreds of billions of dollars in clean energy investments—mandates fossil fuel drilling, a move made to gain the support of corporate Democrats including Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia.
"The only way to avert the worst impacts of the climate crisis is by stopping new fossil fuel projects."
The previous drilling plan expired last year. The new one will include details regarding drilling rights in Alaska and the Gulf of Mexico. Congress will have 60 days to review the proposal.
"The only way to avert the worst impacts of the climate crisis is by stopping new fossil fuel projects. The Biden administration knows this, and yet is making the outlandish and irresponsible decision to increase oil production for decades to come," Wenonah Hauter, executive director of the advocacy group Food & Water Watch—which warned the drilling plan would be a "climate nightmare"—said in a statement.
"This decision is yet another reminder that thanks to Sen. Joe Manchin, the Inflation Reduction Act requires oil and gas drilling on public lands in order to develop clean energy sources like wind and solar," she added. "This short-sighted political dealmaking will continue to have grave consequences."
Biden was praised by green campaigners earlier this month for canceling existing oil and gas drilling leases in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska and for banning drilling on 13 million acres of the National Petroleum Reserve.
However, the president—who campaigned on a pledge to phase out fossil fuel extraction on public lands and waters—has been criticized for approving new drilling permits ata faster rate than his predecessor, former President Donald Trump, and for approving major fossil fuel infrastructure including the Willow Project in Alaska, the Mountain Valley Pipeline in West Virginia, and for green-lighting liquefied natural gas export terminals in Alaska and along the Gulf of Mexico.
Numerous green groups also sued the U.S. Interior Department earlier this year over its plan to offer more than 73 million acres in the Gulf of Mexico in a lease sale.
"Approving new offshore drilling is an unconscionable betrayal of future generations who will be forced to live through an intensifying planetary emergency, and will pose direct and severe threats to healthy oceans and marine life," said Hauter.
"President Biden says that climate change is an existential threat," she added. "Unfortunately, this decision is yet another sign that his administration is not willing to take actions that would match that rhetoric."
Last week, the Biden administration and green groups said they would appeal a Louisiana federal judge's ruling blocking the administration from exempting 6 million acres in the Gulf of Mexico from a drilling lease sale initially scheduled for Wednesday but postponed by the Interior Department's Bureau of Ocean Energy Management after the judge's decision.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Ojai, California Passes First-of-Its-Kind Law Protecting Rights of Nonhuman Animal
"We commend the Ojai City Council for standing up for what is necessary and just," said an advocate.
Sep 28, 2023
Animal rights advocates are applauding this week following a historic vote in the city of Ojai, California, where local lawmakers on Tuesday night adopted an ordinance to recognize the bodily rights of elephants, making it the first U.S. city to recognize the legal rights of nonhuman animal.
The Nonhuman Rights Project (NhRP) helped develop and lobbied for the new ordinance, which was introduced by Councilmember Leslie Rule and passed in a 4-1 vote.
Under the ordinance, it is now illegal in Ojai to subject an elephant to the lack of freedom endured by an elephant named Tarra, who was held in captivity in Ojai Valley and exploited for entertainment—including a rollerskating act—in the early 1980s before becoming the first resident of the nation's largest elephant sanctuary in 1995.
"This legislation is historic," said Courtney Fern, director of government relations and campaigns for NhRP. "It's indisputable that elephants suffer when deprived of their freedom and that animal welfare laws can't end their suffering. For elephants and the nonhuman animal rights movement, we are proud to support this first-of-its-kind ordinance, and we commend the Ojai City Council for standing up for what is necessary and just."
"We have known for some time that elephants have strong empathetic responses to one another's condition."
The new law stems from researchers' findings that "elephants are similarly situated to humans, as they have long-term memories, learning abilities, empathy, and self-awareness," according to the city council.
"We have known for some time that elephants have strong empathetic responses to one another's condition," Mark Scott, interim Ojai city manager, toldKTLA. "I am glad that we are able to make this statement supporting the place of these noble creatures in our world."
NhRP expressed hope that the ordinance "will be the first of many such laws: introduced by elected officials who understand that a sustainable and just future for all life on Earth means extending compassion to and establishing legal rights for nonhuman animals."
"In legislatures, in courtrooms, and beyond, that's what this movement is about," said the group.
Josh Jowitt, senior lecturer on natural and animal rights at Newcastle Law School in the United Kingdom, said the ordinance should not be dismissed as pertaining to "just one city."
"It may not seem much," said Jowitt, "but this decision means that U.S. courts can no longer claim there is no precedent in the country for explicitly recognizing an elephant's right to bodily liberty."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular
Independent, nonprofit journalism needs your help.
Please Pitch In
Today!
Today!