Thread: Texas' voter ID law struck down in federal court

August 30, 2012 12:21 PM


Texas' voter ID law struck down in federal court


generic gavel, court decision, ruling (Getty Images)

(CBS/AP) WASHINGTON - A federal court has ruled against a Texas law that would require voters to present photo IDs to election officials before being allowed to cast ballots in November.

A three-judge panel in Washington ruled Thursday that the law imposes "strict, unforgiving burdens on the poor" and noted that racial minorities in Texas are more likely to live in poverty.

The decision involves an increasingly contentious political issue: a push, largely by Republican-controlled legislatures and governor's offices, to impose strict identification requirements on voters.

The ruling comes in the same week that South Carolina's strict photo ID law is on trial in front of another three-judge panel in the same federal courthouse. A court ruling in the South Carolina case is expected in time for the November election.

Federal court finds discrimination in new Texas voting maps Earlier in the week, Texas' voting districts were thrown again into upheaval after a federal court found evidence of discrimination in new district maps drawn and approved by the state's Republican-controlled Legislature last year.

The U.S. District Court in Washington wrote in a 154-page opinion that the maps don't comply with the federal Voting Rights Act because state prosecutors failed to show Texas lawmakers did not draw congressional and state Senate districts "without discriminatory purposes."

The ruling applies to the maps originally drawn by the Legislature in 2011, and not interim maps drawn by a San Antonio federal court that are to be used in the upcoming elections this November.

CBS News legal analyst Andrew Cohen said the Supreme Court likely will have the final say on voting maps, and it's been quite supportive of Republican redistricting efforts in the recent past. There's likely to be some sort of expedited appeal.

This ruling was a blow to the GOP because it keeps in place the current voting districts.

Texas' voter ID law struck down in federal court - CBS News

The judges couldn't have been hand picked to deliver any other decision.

The Judges Were:



David S. Tatel is a federal judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. ^[1] He joined the court in 1994 after being nominated by President Bill Clinton.

Born in Washington, D.C., Tatel graduated from University of Michigan with his Bachelor's degree in 1963 and received his Juris Doctor, J.D. degree in 1966 from the University of Chicago Law School.^[1]

Tatel began his legal career as an Instructor at the University of Michigan Law School from 1966 to 1967 before entering private practice in Chicago, Illinois until 1969. Tatel served first as the Executive Director of the Chicago Lawyer's Committee for Civil Rights Under Law from 1969 to 1970 before serving as the organization's Director from 1972 to 1974, while pursuing private practice work in Chicago, Illinois from 1970 to 1972. Tatel entered private practice in Washington, D.C. from 1974 to 1977 before serving as the Director of the Office of Civil Rights at the U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services until 1979. Tatel then resumed private practice in Washington, D.C. until 1994.<sup>[1]

http://judgepedia.org/index.php/David_Tatel</sup>



Rosemary Collyer

Rosemary M. Collyer is a federal judge for the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. She joined the court in 2002 after being nominated by President George W. Bush. ^[1]

A native of Maryland, Collyer graduated from Trinity College with her Bachelor's Degree in 1968 and later graduated from University of Denver College of Law with her juris doctorate degree in 1977.^[1]

Collyer started her legal career as a private practice attorney licensed in the State of Colorado from 1977 to 1981 before becoming Chairwoman of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission from 1981 to 1984. Collyer later became General counsel for the National Labor Relations Board from 1984 to 1989 before resuming private practice licensed in Washington, DC from 1989 to 2002.^[1]

http://judgepedia.org/index.php/Rosemary_Collyer

Federal Court Supports Illegal Obama Multiple Sales Regs

Through those regulations, Obama has demanded, by regulatory fiat, that firearms licensees in four southwestern states report multiple sales of certain long guns to the federal government.
In upholding this action, Judge Rosemary Collyer -– a Bush appointee! –- ignored the Constitution, the Supreme Court’s decision in the Heller case, and the clear language of federal law.

^{Robert Leon Wilkins}

Wilkins is from Muncie, Indiana. He earned his J.D. in 1989 from Harvard Law School and his B.S. in 1986 from the Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology. ^[2]

• Law clerk for Judge Earl Gilliam of the United States District Court for the Southern District of California
• Attorney with the Public Defender Service for the District of Columbia, 1996 - 2008
  
  • Chief of special litigation, 1996 - 2000
  • Trustee, 2002 - 2007
  • Vice chair, 2007 - 2008
  
  
• Partner in the Washington, D.C. office of Venable LLP, 2008-2010 ^[2]

istrict of Columbia

On May 20, 2010 Wilkins was nominated by President Obama to serve as a District Judge for the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. He is nominated to fill the seat vacated by James Robertson. ^[3]

The American Bar Association gave Wilkins a unanimous rating of "Well Qualified". ^[4]
Wilkins' hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee was on July 28, 2010. ^[5] You can find his Committee Questionnaire available here and his Questions for the Record available here. On September 23, 2010, the Senate Judiciary Committee voted unanimously to send Wilkins' nomination to the U.S. Senate for a vote. ^[6]
Wilkins was confirmed by the U.S. Senate on December 22, 2010.^[1][7]

Robert Leon Wilkins - Judgepedia

Texas AG calls voter ID ruling 'disappointing,' vows to appeal to Supreme Court

Published August 30, 2012
FoxNews.com

Texas' top attorney told Fox News his state will appeal to the Supreme Court after a federal panel of judges on Thursday rejected the Texas law requiring voters to present photo IDs before casting a ballot.

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott, who is in Tampa for the Republican National Convention, called the ruling "deeply disappointing." He said the state is trying to prevent "fraudulent voting," claiming, for example, that hundreds of dead people were listed as voting in the state's recent primary.

"This is actually a national trend, where states are trying to do a better job of securing the integrity of the ballot boxes, and yet courts (are) pushing back against that, seemingly promoting and allowing illegal voters to participate in the election process," Abbott said.

The court decision came down from a three-judge panel in Washington, D.C. -- during the same week that South Carolina's strict photo ID law is on trial in front of another three-judge panel in the same federal courthouse. A ruling is expected before the November election.
The panel, in the Texas case, unanimously ruled that the law imposes "strict, unforgiving burdens on the poor," who are often racial minorities.
The decision involves an increasingly contentious political issue in the U.S.: a push, largely by Republican-controlled legislatures and governors, to impose strict identification requirements on voters.

Republicans say they are fighting voter fraud. Democrats, with support from a number of studies, say voter fraud is largely non-existent and that Republicans are trying to disenfranchise minorities, poor people and college students -- all groups that tend to support Democrats.

In the Texas case, the Justice Department called several lawmakers, all of them Democrats, who said they detected a clear racial motive in the push for the voter ID law. Lawyers for Texas argued that the state was simply tightening its laws.

David Tatel, an appeals court judge appointed by President Bill Clinton and writing for the panel, called the Texas law "the most stringent in the nation." He said it would impose a heavier burden on voters than a similar law in Indiana, previously upheld by the Supreme Court, and one in Georgia, which the Justice Department allowed to take effect without objection.

During an appearance in Texas in July, Attorney General Eric Holder said the state's photo ID requirement amounts to a poll tax, a term that harkens back to the days after the Civil War when blacks across the South were stripped of their right to vote.

Abbott, though, said his attorneys will be putting together the paperwork to "be appealing the case on to the Supreme Court."
"Having to take the time to get a photo and bring all your documents together is not an infringement on your right to vote," he said.

Last year, new voter ID laws passed in Kansas, Mississippi, Rhode Island and Wisconsin. In addition to Texas and South Carolina, Alabama and Tennessee tightened existing voter ID laws to require photo ID.

Governors in Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, New Hampshire and North Carolina vetoed strict new photo ID laws.

This year, Pennsylvania enacted its own law and voting-rights groups who filed suit in an effort to stop it are appealing to the state Supreme Court. A hearing is scheduled for Sept. 13 in Philadelphia. The Republican administration of Gov. Tom Corbett says a U.S. Justice Department inquiry into the state's tough new voter identification law is politically motivated. The department is requesting the state's voter registration list, plus any database of registered voters who lack a valid photo ID that the law requires voters to show before their ballots can be counted.

A report by the non-governmental Brennan Center for Justice determined that new voting restrictions could suppress the votes of more than 5 million young, minority, low-income and disabled voters.

Texas AG calls voter ID ruling 'disappointing,' vows to appeal to Supreme Court | Fox News