Aug 4, 2016

Wisconsin DoJ: Voting Rights Legal Battle Will Sow Confusion as DoJ Intends to Wage War v. Voting Rights

Wisconsin Republicans are hostile to liberties of citizens
to vote. (One Wisconsin Now Institute v. Thomsen)
Alice in WisconsinLand

Wisconsin Republicans want voter obstruction now because they say they will fight for obstruction again and its efforts may confuse voters

Wisconsin Republicans do not want non-Republicans showing up to vote.

The Wisconsin Dept. of Justice has filed an appeal of a second Wisconsin federal pro-voting rights decision, (Wisconsin Dept. of Justice), (One Wisconsin Institute v. Thomsen), following the defeat of Republican voter obstruction efforts in two federal cases.

Republican DoJ attorneys argue the Republican transformation of Wisconsin election law against voters will confuse voters unless court-ordered voting guarantees are stopped, (stayed), because the DoJ will file more appeals in federal appellate court should its efforts be rebuffed in its first appeal, (Wisconsin Dept. of Justice), (Motion to Expedite).

Welcome to Republican world, where Republicans claim to be concerned their voter obstruction laws will be confusing to voters if Republicans continue to oppose voting rights, which Republicans promise to do.

Not fighting voting rights is an option that has not occurred to Republicans apparently.

In One Wisconsin Institute v. Thomsen, citizens' voting rights won a major victory last week, (Mal Contends), (U.S. District Court of the Western District of Wisconsin (Case 15-cv-324) (Moritzlaw).

The case is being appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.

Numerous Republican-enacted actions against voting rights are permanently enjoined, (halted) in One Wisconsin Institute, and now Republican attorneys point to the Wisconsin Elections Board (GAB) 2015-2016 calendar showing the September 22 deadline, (p. 15), for municipal clerks to mail absentee ballots to voters.

This case became titled One Wisconsin Institute v. Thomsen, as of August 1, after Republican-enacted changes to Wisconsin state election authority took effect.

Wisconsin DoJ attorneys write the reasoning in the Frank case opinion is incorporated in the One Wisconsin opinion, (Docketing Statement).

This case is related to a case currently pending before this Court, Ruthelle Frank, et al., v. Scott Walker, et al., Nos. 16-3003 and 16-3052. Both cases involve challenges to Wisconsin’s voter ID law—specifically, to the petition process for obtaining free IDs from the Wisconsin Department of Transportation, Division of Motor Vehicles. The district court in this case, [One Wisconsin], incorporated the factual findings of the district court in Frank, which in turn based its decision on evidence presented in this case. (See Dkt. 234:8 (“The court also adopts the facts found by Judge Adelman [in Frank] concerning the history and operation of the [ID petition process], which he based substantially on the evidence presented in this case. Frank v. Walker, No. 11-cv-1128, 2016 WL 3948068 (E.D. Wis. July 19, 2016).”).

One doctrine that will likely be used by the federal appellate court in deciding this One Wisconsin case is outlined by Judge Frank Easterbrook in his April 12, 2106 opinion in Frank v. Walker, (Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit), the other Wisconsin federal voting rights case.

Easterbrook writes in part in his opinion remanding the Frank case to U.S. District Court to implement his opinion in the case: "The right to vote is personal and is not defeated by the fact that 99% of other people can  secure the necessary credentials easily," (p. 7, p. 4 in PDF). This spells a likely legal defeat for Republicans.

As some point, it is possible political pressure will become sufficiently strong for voting rights that Republicans will stop their war against voters.

It's won't be reasonableness that will stop them.

No comments:

Post a Comment