The 2008 presidential election was an inspiration for many citizens to take part in the American democratic process, including first-time voter and convicted felon Eric Stephen Willems of Minnesota. Unfortunately, that vote cost Willems, who was on probation, a trip back to jail, according to the Associated Press last week.
I wrote about this back in October and it appears the Supreme Court will hear review on the appeal of the Texas voting rights case of Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District v. Mukasey (08-322).
SCOTUSBLOG states that this case is really going to boil down to what constitutional test the Court applies to this case if they do to determine if the law goes beyond Congress's legislative authority.
The Texas district urges the Court to apply the test the Justices have fashioned for judging Congress's authority to pass laws to enforce the Fourteenth Amendment. The new case is largely a test under the Fifteenth Amendment, which extended voting rights to minority citizens. The District Court said the law is valid, whatever test is applied to its constitutionality.
This will be an interesting case especially regarding the "preclearance requirement" which requires that before any changes can be made for this select group of jurisdictions to their election laws without approval from DOJ or a three judge panel. In other words, have we moved past the years of voter rights violations and finally into an era where the clause is no longer valid.
My original entry is loaded with all the links to the details so I won't overload this entry with redundant information. There was good discussion back then by Baby Snooks and others.
After the U.S. Supreme Court upheld one of the country's strictest voter ID laws in April, several states rushed to pass similar bills before the year's end. By December, more than 25 states introduced legislation to require voter ID at the polls. Though none of these bills were successful this year, lawmakers in several states are hoping to revive such restrictive requirements in 2009.
Since July of this year, at least seven states have pre-filed or carried over voter ID legislation for the 2009-2010 sessions, including Nevada, Maryland, Missouri, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Texas and Virginia.
(An important issue -- and our 7,000th diary on BOR! What a feat! - promoted by Phillip Martin)
While reviewing some of the cases slated for the 2008-2009 term of the US Supreme Court I came across what could be one of the biggest cases of this year's term. The case is Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District Number One v. Gonzales. This case is local to Texas and could have impact on an interesting facet of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Within the Voting Rights Act is a provision that forbids nine states and nearly six dozen counties with histories of racial voting discrimination from making changes to their election laws without receiving approval from the DOJ or a panel of three federal judges in Washington.
We spend a lot of time in these news updates showing how charges of voter fraud are used to discredit voter participation efforts and prime the pump for voter suppression efforts, such as the passage of voter ID bills, pushing for proof of citizenship, engaging in draconian voter purge efforts, and imposing sever restrictions on voter registration drives. We have also spent a lot of time carefully delineating the politics behind these efforts, starting with our March 2007 report The Politics Of Voter Fraud and continuing on in these diaries to name but two venues.
This diary is cross-posted from Project Vote's Daily Kos entry and our own blog, Voting Matters.
Weekly Voting Rights News Update
By Erin Ferns
As we count down to the new year - a time when the Supreme Court will weigh-in on the voter ID debate and we will cast ballots for the next president of the United States - Texas lawmakers continue to aggressively present the alleged issue of non-citizens voting. This week, voter ID was added to the list of topics to be studied by the House State Affairs Committee for the 2009 legislative session, an action deemed a partisan ploy to reintroduce the "discriminatory and divisive" legislation of 2007. Stirring the so-called voter fraud plot in Texas to greater heights, a coalition of legislators requested Secretary of State Phil Wilson "implement more stringent proof of citizenship requirements before casting a ballot in Texas" in November 2008.
The San Antonio Express-News has an update today about an ongoing investigation into allegations of voter fraud. This is one of those cases that depends on a chain of circumstance and reasoning that often does not hold together.
According to the story, the investigation was set in motion after Bexar County Elections Administrator JacqueCallanen cross-checked voter lists against a list of people who'd declined jury duty summons on the ground they were not citizens. Apparently, she found 330 people who claimed non-citizenship but were registered to vote. Apparently, 41 of those people had actually voted in elections going back to 2001.
(Via Capitol Annex, 6 TX Congressman were among those that voted against the VRA reauthorization. Here's how the TX delegation voted on the amendments. (Thanks, Vince) - promoted by Phillip Martin)
Considering the Supreme Court's decision, I think the VRA is especially critical for Texas Democrats. This is cross-posted at KickingAss and at DailyKos where it could use your support!
It's pretty unbelievable that legislation as critical to our democracy is being attacked, even dismantled.
Today the House considers the Voting Rights Act reauthorization. Despite the promises of the Republican leadership to bring this bipartisan, bicameral bill up under suspension of the rules – with no amendments - the House will consider four extremely dangerous amendments.
These amendments should be defeated. They each chip away at the protections of the Voting Rights Act, weakening it. When we allow that to happen we weaken our democracy. The Voting Rights Act was aimed at preventing tactics like literacy tests, poll taxes, intimidation, threats, and violence, which kept many Americans from exercising their freedom to vote. Today the danger of discrimination still exists, which is why the Voting Rights Act is critical.
