"My concern is that this might be a signal that we will see an assault on voting rights," Wendy Weiser, the director of the Democracy
Program at the Brennan Center for Justice, told me today. "Claims of nonexistent voter fraud and noncitizen voting are precisely the kinds of baseless justifications that we’ve seen for the wave of laws in the past couple of years restricting voting access."
Trump’s choice of Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions as attorney general makes this more plausible. As a U.S. attorney in the mid-1980s, Sessions tried to prosecute three civil rights activists for voter fraud, when they were trying to help poor, elderly, and illiterate people to vote. They were acquitted, (Sargent, Washington Post).
Prosecuting voting rights activists as opposed to murdering voting rights activists is not progress to a rational mind.
Showing posts with label Republican Voter Obstruction. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Republican Voter Obstruction. Show all posts
Nov 28, 2016
Jun 9, 2016
Republicans Escalate War on Voting Rights
![]() |
| Why Is It So Hard to Vote In America and What Can We Do to Fix It - Brennan Center for Justice |
This is a continuation of the years-long multi-state, Republican-led attack on voting.
Federal litigation against two swing states' anti-voting rights laws show the Republican efforts to make voting as difficult as possible, akin to navigating the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) if a voter can find a local office open.
Ohio
"For the second time in two weeks, a judge in Ohio has struck down provisions of the state’s voting laws. Federal district court Judge Algenon Marbley said two laws passed in 2014 violated the Voting Rights Act and the Constitution’s guarantee of equal protection with laws that made it too easy for provisional ballots to be thrown out for 'trivial' errors," come reports from Ohio (see Graham, The Atlantic).
Wisconsin
From Wisconsin: U.S. District Judge Lynn Adelman rejected Republicans' motion (made through the Wisconsin Dept. of Justice), to halt judicial consideration of the restoration of voting rights for citizens who have difficulty obtaining the Republican-crafted range of acceptable voter IDs, another Republican-imposed pre-condition to vote (WBAY-TV News, AP).
Republican suppression strategy on voting rights is to pass laws making voting as difficult as possible for disfavored classes of voters, then oppose and seek to stall all litigation seeking to secure voting rights for the targeted classes of voting.
This is what is being addressed in the federal cases, Ruthelle Frank, et al. v. Scott Walker and One Wisconsin Institute v. Nichol.
The Republican strategy comes as Scott Walker and legislative Republicans have changed the administrative law process of rule-making into a Republican-Party political operation.
An effective method to stop Republican-disfavored Wisconsin voters is to make obtaining necessary voting IDs conditioned on the whim of the state Department of Motor Vehicles personnel.
In Wisconsin, residents who literally die waiting on the DMV to issue acceptable voter IDs have engaged in "customer-initiated cancellation," (Opoien, The Capital Times).
The successful ACLU response to the Wisconsin Republicans' DoJ's June 6 motion in Ruthelle Frank, et al. v. Scott Walker, et al. is reproduced below.
Republicans sought to stay (halting a trial or other legal proceeding), the voting rights advocates' work to prevent "vulnerable voters from being disenfranchised in the rapidly-approaching elections on August 9 and November 8, 2016."
---
ACLU response to the Wisconsin Republicans' DoJ's June 6 motion in Ruthelle Frank, et al. v. Scott Walker, et al
June 6, 2016
via ECF (Electronic Case Files]
The Honorable Lynn Adelman
362 United States District Courthouse
517 East Wisconsin Avenue
Milwaukee, WI 53202
Re: Ruthelle Frank, et al. v. Scott Walker, et al., Case No. 11-cv-1128
Dear Judge Adelman,
We represent Plaintiffs in the above-captioned case, and we write in opposition to Defendants’ letter filed today.
This Court should deny Defendants’ last-minute request to stay this case, which has been pending for five years and was filed four years before the One Wisconsin case.
Plaintiffs will soon be filing a motion for preliminary injunction to prevent vulnerable voters from being disenfranchised in the rapidly-approaching elections on August 9 and November 8, 2016.
The motion will provide sufficient time for the Court to rule, and for any necessary changes to be implemented in advance of those elections.
Defendants’ remaining requests related to discovery scheduling issues should be addressed after Plaintiffs’ motion for preliminary injunction is resolved—that is, after the imminent, irreparable harm to Wisconsin voters has been addressed (and prevented).
The outcome of Plaintiffs’ motion may greatly impact how remaining discovery is structured, to the extent that any is even necessary.
Defendants lastly raise various substantive arguments in the letter that can be addressed in the context of Plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction.
Plaintiffs intend to seek class certification in conjunction with their motion for a preliminary injunction, at which point Defendants can respond.
Defendants’ opposition brief can also fully address their latest attempt at evading constitutional liability, the new administrative rule Wis. EmR1618, in response to Plaintiffs’ motion. As Plaintiffs expect to demonstrate, this “new” rule is unlikely to alleviate the unreasonable burdens faced by Plaintiff class members. After five long years of DMV involvement, it is now clear that a bureaucracy designed to regulate driving has no business being the gatekeeper for our democracy.
This Court should deny Defendants requests and, Plaintiffs respectfully request, act quickly on Plaintiffs’ imminent motion for a preliminary injunction. [links added]
Respectfully,
s/ Sean J. Young
Sean J. Young
Attorney for Plaintiffs
American Civil Liberties Union Foundation, Inc.
May 23, 2016
Virginia's White Supremacist Republicans Fight Voting Rights
From the Richmond Times-Dispatch, Virginia Republicans are fighting tooth-and-nail to stop the restoration of voting rights of 100,000s of mostly black Virginia citizens.
"Virginia's 1901-1902 constitutional convention, which set up poll taxes, literacy tests and disenfranchisement for felons as barriers for African-American participation," is cited by election law scholar, A.E. Dick Howard, professor at the University of Virginia School of Law, who consulted with Gov. Terry McAuliffe in McAuliffe's continuing efforts to restore the voting rights of Virginians, (Nolan, Times-Dispatch).
As long as black Americans can vote, white supremacists in the Republican Party across the nation will do their worst to impede voting rights, often employing the deplorable tactics of Jim Crow-era laws and state constitutions like Virginia's.
Notes Laura Vozzella in the Washington Post: "Virginia is one of only a few states that permanently disenfranchise felons, a practice that McAuliffe and other Democrats trace back to the Jim Crow era since it disproportionately affects African Americans."
Virginia offers one example.
Wisconsin is another.
From the Beloit Daily News:
"Virginia's 1901-1902 constitutional convention, which set up poll taxes, literacy tests and disenfranchisement for felons as barriers for African-American participation," is cited by election law scholar, A.E. Dick Howard, professor at the University of Virginia School of Law, who consulted with Gov. Terry McAuliffe in McAuliffe's continuing efforts to restore the voting rights of Virginians, (Nolan, Times-Dispatch).
As long as black Americans can vote, white supremacists in the Republican Party across the nation will do their worst to impede voting rights, often employing the deplorable tactics of Jim Crow-era laws and state constitutions like Virginia's.
Notes Laura Vozzella in the Washington Post: "Virginia is one of only a few states that permanently disenfranchise felons, a practice that McAuliffe and other Democrats trace back to the Jim Crow era since it disproportionately affects African Americans."
Virginia offers one example.
Wisconsin is another.
From the Beloit Daily News:
... A trial was held this week in federal court dealing with Voter ID and various other elections changes enacted since 2011. The plaintiffs argue the changes, taken together, suppress the votes of minorities, young people and others, particularly in urban areas. Several expert witnesses presented the results of academic studies supporting that argument.Wherever black folks vote, and Republicans rule the state legislature, no voter is safe.
But perhaps the most interesting testimony came from a former Republican aide to a Wisconsin senator who later chose not to seek re-election when his term expired. The aide testified to being present in a closed Republican caucus when legislators originally discussed passing the Voter ID bill. He said senators were 'giddy' at the prospect of what such a law could do to curtail turnout among certain groups of citizens, predicting it would make it easier for Republicans to win future elections.
Jan 7, 2016
New GOP Scheme to Evict Tenants—Can Be Used as Voter Obstruction Tool
Wisconsin Republicans and only Republicans are floating a radical bill that would allow landlords to "evict tenants in five days if they suspect criminal activity under a Republican-backed plan to rewrite Wisconsin's landlord-tenant laws," (Johnson, Wisconsin Public Radio).
Beyond a complete restructuring of tenant rights and private landlord-tenant contract law in Wisconsin, Assembly Bill 568 effectively grants Wisconsin landlords, (many of whom are Republican or GOP-leaning corporations), judicial power.
The argument over tenant rights v. landlord rights will tend to obscure the larger ALEC-Republican Party objective of voter disenfranchisement of citizens likely to not vote Republican.
AB 568 would allow landlords to state their suspicion of a tenant being party to illegal behavior, without evidence, and would allow for mass evictions of citizens in financially stressed, segregated black neighborhoods or white university (student) neighborhoods just weeks before Election Day.
No actual criminal activity needed for Republican-leaning landlords to clear any inner-city voter rolls of Democratic voters by pronouncing them homeless weeks before a major statewide election.
"Wisconsin law requires that you live at your current address for 28 consecutive days to be eligible to vote from your new address," notes the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board site.
The 28-day residency requirement is the result of a Republican-passed law that increased residency requirements from 10 days to 28 days a year, just months after Scott Walker was elected.
Wisconsin Republican have passed a full 33 legislative changes to obstruct voters since 2011, (Ferral, The Capital Times).
Voter confusion, frustration and disenfranchisement are predictable consequences of the latest GOP voter obstruction scheme.
This would apply emphatically to same-day voter registrations.
Many young voters, renters, student and minority voters change their addresses and register to vote on election day.
Statewide Election Day-registering voters composed some 266,974 voters, 10.6 percent of the electorate in November 2012, notes the GAB.
Beyond a complete restructuring of tenant rights and private landlord-tenant contract law in Wisconsin, Assembly Bill 568 effectively grants Wisconsin landlords, (many of whom are Republican or GOP-leaning corporations), judicial power.
The argument over tenant rights v. landlord rights will tend to obscure the larger ALEC-Republican Party objective of voter disenfranchisement of citizens likely to not vote Republican.
AB 568 would allow landlords to state their suspicion of a tenant being party to illegal behavior, without evidence, and would allow for mass evictions of citizens in financially stressed, segregated black neighborhoods or white university (student) neighborhoods just weeks before Election Day.
No actual criminal activity needed for Republican-leaning landlords to clear any inner-city voter rolls of Democratic voters by pronouncing them homeless weeks before a major statewide election.
"Wisconsin law requires that you live at your current address for 28 consecutive days to be eligible to vote from your new address," notes the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board site.
The 28-day residency requirement is the result of a Republican-passed law that increased residency requirements from 10 days to 28 days a year, just months after Scott Walker was elected.
Wisconsin Republican have passed a full 33 legislative changes to obstruct voters since 2011, (Ferral, The Capital Times).
Voter confusion, frustration and disenfranchisement are predictable consequences of the latest GOP voter obstruction scheme.
This would apply emphatically to same-day voter registrations.
Many young voters, renters, student and minority voters change their addresses and register to vote on election day.
Statewide Election Day-registering voters composed some 266,974 voters, 10.6 percent of the electorate in November 2012, notes the GAB.
Mar 23, 2014
Federal Intervention to Protect Voting in Wisconsin
![]() |
| Bending Toward Justice, The Voting Rights Act and the Transformation of American Democracy (Gary May. Basic Books; 2013) |
As other Republican state efforts to obstruct voters continue, the federal response is being contemplated as the formal structures of this democracy are under assault at the state level by one political party. Wisconsin is leading the way.
The Republican voter obstruction effort is a years-long project to stop as many non-GOP voters as possible from voting, and the battleground is the states where Republicans have control of both the legislature and governor's office.
In February 2012, attorney Ernest A. Canning argued for U.S. Dept. of Justice intervention in Wisconsin based on Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, referring to a legal challenge to Wisconsin's photo voter ID law.
The case is League of United Latin American Citizens of Wisconsin v. Deininger (Case 2:12-cv-00185), now under deliberation after a November 2013 trial that saw a mountain of social scientific evidence of discrimination presented against Wisconsin Act 23, a restrictive photo voter ID law. See also Frank v. Walker, (Case 11cv1128), a case held at trial with League.
An observer said the trial was a rout for pro-voting rights advocates, the consensus opinion.
Judge Richard Posner, who wrote the opinion for the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in Crawford v. Marion County Election Board later affirmed by the Supreme Court in 2008, said in October last year that the judiciary requires "data" and "empirical evidence," both in adjudication and on the consequences of its decisions and opinions.
"I plead guilty to having written the majority opinion (affirmed by the Supreme Court) upholding Indiana’s requirement that prospective voters prove their identity with a photo ID—a type of law now widely regarded as a means of voter suppression rather than of fraud prevention," said Posner.
This evidence is now available, especially from the Wisconsin trial, and it suggests a crisis of democracy demanding both a judicial and federal executive branch response.
"The credible evidence convincingly proved that Act 23 will impose harsh and widespread burdens on voters. Virtually all of the factual testimony - of Plaintiffs, other voters, non-parties who provide assistance to voters, as well as Defendants and state employees called adversely by Plaintiffs - went essentially unchallenged by Defendants. All this evidence compels one conclusion: Act 23 violates Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act ("VRA"), 42 U.S.C. 1973, and the Fourteenth and Twenty -Fourth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution, and must be enjoined," reads a Frank v. Walker Post-trial brief challenging Wisconsin Voter ID Law. Act 23—passed with unanimous GOP support, unanimous Democratic opposition and unanimous opposition from civil rights and voting rights citizen groups.
The GOP's effort to hold down minority voting participation is the "largest legislative effort to roll back voting rights since the post-Reconstruction era," as characterized by Judith Browne Dianis, a civil rights litigator at The Advancement Project.
On March 19, 2014, a "federal court decided Kobach v. United States Election Assistance Commission. The upshot of this opinion, if it stands on appeal, is that states with Republican legislatures and/or Republican chief election officials are likely to require documentary proof of citizenship," reports Rick Hasen.
That case looks weak. But with Federalist Society jurists sprinkled throughout the judiciary, who can say?
On the state level Wisconsin and Ohio are another front of the war on voting.
Since 2011, "Scott Walker and his right-wing Wisconsin GOP legislative lieutenants - - for the second time since their ascendancy in 2011- - have passed legislation to cut the hours of in-person absentee voting," reports Jim Rowen. "The desired outcome - - abetted by the GOP-initiated Voter ID statute - - is to tilt elections and embed GOP power by obstructing ballot-box access in cities with large populations of minority, transit-dependent, Democratic-leaning voters. This coordinated, one-party manipulation of state power for partisan and constituencies' advantage should be slapped down hard and overturned without equivocation by state courts to ensure unobstructed voting in Wisconsin."
Rowen, civil rights activists and citizens are calling for federal Voting Rights oversight to protect Wisconsin voters against the Republican political power structure aiming to determine who is able to vote in Wisconsin through a raft of legislation that appears unlawful under both the federal and Wisconsin constitutions.
Voting Rights Act Fix
In Congress, legislation is being considered that appears to prohibit the Voting Rights Act from being used against state voter obstruction laws such as Wisconsin's photo voter ID and other anti-voting laws.
Ironically, this legislation is meant to repair the Voting Rights Act, gutted by the Supreme Court.
The Voting Rights Act (VRA) legislation, like the judicial and executive response, should single out and challenge state efforts using IDs as a tool to determine who gets to vote.
"The Voting Rights Act itself has been called the single most effective piece of civil rights legislation ever passed by Congress," reads the U.S. Dept. of Justice site.
This is precisely why five GOP justices targeted the VRA in Shelby v. Holder, despite as Judge Posner would note today, an extensive empirical record.
Writes Justice Ginsburg in dissent:
In the long course of the legislative process, Congress 'amassed a sizable record.' Northwest Austin Municipal Util. Dist. No. One v. Holder, 557 U. S. 193, 205 (2009) . See also 679 F. 3d 848, 865–873 (CADC 2012) (describing the “extensive record” supporting Congress’ determination that “serious and widespread intentional discrimination persisted in covered jurisdictions”). The House and Senate Judiciary Committees held 21 hearings, heard from scores of witnesses, received a number of investigative reports and other written documentation of continuing discrimination in covered jurisdictions. In all, the legislative record Congress compiled filled more than 15,000 pages. H. R. Rep. 109–478, at 5, 11–12; S. Rep. 109–295, at 2–4,15. The compilation presents countless “examples of flagrant racial discrimination” since the last reauthorization; Congress also brought to light systematic evidence that “intentional racial discrimination in voting remains so serious and widespread in covered jurisdictions that section 5 preclearance is still needed.” 679 F. 3d, at 866.Scott Walker and the Republicans never campaigned on it, and Wisconsin is inflicted by an underground political movement that has seized Wisconsin government and is attempting to disenfranchise the people who comprise the state.
The U.S. Dept. of Justice must step in to protect the rights of the Wisconsin people as guaranteed in the Fourteenth, Fifteenth and Twenty-Fourth Amendments to the United States Constitution, and pursuant to Section Two of the Voting Rights Act: Enforce the Fifteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
Nov 10, 2013
GOP Moves to Stop Testimony on African American and Latino Voter Obstruction
![]() |
| Drawing by George Grosz - Keep this dark guy from voting or making any other trouble, by any means necessary |
- E. Earl Parson and Monique McLaughlin (Columbia Journal of Race and Law; Vol 3.1, pp 103-118) (2013)
Now there a couple of good rebuttal witnesses for civil rights activists in the landmark trial of the Wisconsin Photo Voter ID law used for voter obstruction, in violation of the Voting Rights Act. I'm no attorney but I would get a hold of these folks.
---
Leland Beatty of Ethnic Technologies LLC will offer expert testimony in the Wisconsin voter ID trial.
Beatty will explain how African American and Latino registered voters are stopped from voting by Wisconsin Act 23, the GOP Photo Voter ID law passed with unanimous GOP support against the opposition of Democrats, civil rights groups, voting rights groups and local officials.
Voter obstruction, it's as Republican as opposition to women's' reproductive health.
What has the GOP in a tizzy about Leland Beatty is the plaintiffs' plan to put Beatty on the stand as an expert witness, and also put on the stand a former employee of Ethnic Technologies, John Mas, to describe what Ethnic Technologies does in plain, lay language.
Reads the plaintiffs' November 4, 2013 motion on the matter:
Mr. Beatty will testify about the impact of the voter ID provisions of 2011 Wisconsin Act 23 on African American and Latino voters. Specifically, Mr. Beatty’s expert testimony will include an analysis of the percentages of African American and Latino registered voters who lack driver’s licenses or state-issued identification cards that match their voter records, and how those compare to the percentages of white voters who lack similar identification. ... Plaintiffs contacted Mr. John Mas, a former employee of Ethnic Technologies, and asked him to offer factual testimony describing Ethnic Technologies and the services it performs.Yep, Mr. Mas must be stopped, the GOP lawyers say.
And that goes double for African American and Latino voters.
The federal trial features two consolidated cases, Frank v. Walker, (Case 11cv1128), and League of United Latin American Citizens of Wisconsin v. Deininger (Case 2:12-cv-00185.
The League case is the first trial in the country post-Shelby County v. Holder using Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act after the U.S. Supreme Court gutted the Act (Section 4) last summer, as noted by The Advancement Project.
Scott Walker held a press conference the first day of the trial in Milwaukee last week and pronounced: "There really is no barrier for people (posed by mandating GOP-crafted Photo Voter ID as an additional requirement to vote)." (Marley. MJS)
It's a very bet Scott Walker never talked to any of the plaintiffs, any homeless veterans, and certainly not Leland Beatty, John Mas, Lorraine Minnite, or any other voter, trial witness or expert who could easily disconfirm Walker's stated belief.
The reason is voter obstruction is Walker's objective, and Walker has no interest in what any civil rights advocate, voting rights expert, or Wisconsin citizen who does not know his place has to say about voting.
Nov 8, 2013
GOP Paper Bashes Photo Voter ID Law, as Bureaucrat Swoons on Stand
![]() |
| The Raft of Medusa by Théodore Géricault (1819) |
We have asked if news outlets will play it dumb during what could be a landmark federal voting rights trial on photo voter ID taking place now in Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
Some news coverage and editorial comment of the voting rights trial [Frank v. Walker, (Case 11cv1128), and League of United Latin American Citizens of Wisconsin v. Deininger (Case 2:12-cv-00185, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin] are encouraging.
The testimony of the top Wisconsin election official is not encouraging.
Wisconsin newspaper staff across the state knows the GOP game is to attack the foundation of our democracy—voting.
The undesirables have no business on the Koch Ship, Wisconsin, the GOP believes: Discard them.
This morning's Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel is instructive of a different sentiment: "Don't change voter ID law; get rid of it."
No one ever accused the Journal-Sentinel as being anything other than a GOP-leaning paper, but on Photo Voter ID, the editorial page and news coverage have been consistently excellent, though this reader would like the editors to simply state that Scott Walker and the Republicans are a bunch of goddamn liars—something the Journal-Sentinel staff knows to be true.
Nationally, the Republican project to restrict voting is properly derided as anti-democratic, and racist (as an ancillary benefit for the Tea Party).
"You must register. You must vote. You must learn, so your choice advances your interest and the interest of our beloved Nation. Your future, and your children's future, depend upon it, and I don't believe that you are going to let them down.," said President Lyndon Johnson in the capitol rotunda at the signing of the Voting Rights Act. That was in 1965.
Today of course, LBJ's aspirations come as unwanted news to Wisconsin's Government Accountability Board (GAB) whose staff live in fear for their jobs; a couple of pro-voting rights moves and Republicans will pass legislation disbanding the GAB and replace the Board members with GOP partisans.
Kevin Kennedy, Director and General Counsel of the Wisconsin GAB testified yesterday that "his main concern about the 2011 photo voter-ID law was training the state’s uncommonly large number of elections workers." (AP report)
That's Kennedy's main concern?
The GAB states as its mission (in part) that "Wisconsin elections are administered through open, fair and impartial procedures that guarantee that the vote of each individual counts and that the will of the electorate prevails."
Under Act 23, constitutionally qualified, registered voters who have voted for decades can walk up to the polling table, state their name and address, and be told by their neighbors staffing the polling table: 'Hey, Don; good morning. Oh, no acceptable voter ID? Sorry man, you can't vote. Have to protect the integrity of the election, brother.'
Kennedy must have lost consciousness for a moment on the stand yesterday.
It seems repulsive that GAB staff will not stand up to the anti-American Republican Party attacking the very foundation of our democracy because Kennedy and his colleagues fear for their jobs, content to let the votes of citizens be discarded out of career convenience and passive compliance to GOP dictates.
Kennedy could have testified in this landmark case and spoke the truth that he well knows: That requiring Photo Voter IDs as narrowly prescribed by the GOP's Act 23 has the effect of stopping legal voters from voting, and has no rational basis because in-person voting fraud is a myth, actually a lie.
Kennedy took the easy way out in his appearance in federal court.
If the GAB is so afraid to utter a word to save the legal votes of legal Wisconsin voters, what good is this cowardly body against the many-tentacled Republican Party eviscerating our democratic processes?
Yes, I know there are dedicated and good people at the GAB, but if all they offer is their silence and acquiescence, they may as well not exist; they are a woefully inadequate life raft against the anti-democratic partisans working to rip apart the fabric of Wisconsin democracy.
Put simply, what part of government accountability does the GAB not understand?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)

.jpg)


.jpg)