iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Texas Voter ID Law Blocked By Justice Department

PETE YOST   03/12/12 10:41 PM ET  AP

WASHINGTON — A photo ID requirement for voters in Texas could disenfranchise hundreds of thousands of registered Hispanics, the Justice Department declared Monday in its latest move against Republican-led voting changes in many states that have drawn protests from minorities, poor people and students.

The Justice objection means that now a federal court in Washington will decide whether Texas, as well as South Carolina, will be allowed to enforce its new voter photo ID requirements. Justice's move merely blocked a Texas law until the court rules.

Other states have similar laws and more are moving toward them as advocates portray the restrictions as needed to combat voter fraud.

The Justice Department conveyed its objection in a letter to Texas officials that was also filed in the U.S. District Court case in Washington between Texas and the department. Justice said Hispanic voters in Texas are at least 50 percent more likely and possibly more than twice as likely as non-Hispanic voters to lack a driver's license or a personal state-issued photo ID, which the Texas law requires.

The range was so broad because Texas provided two sets of registered voter data to the Justice Department. It relied on the two Texas-supplied lists for the estimates of 175,000 and 304,000 registered Hispanic Texas voters who do not have driver's licenses or state-issued IDs.

Voter ID bills were "the hottest topic of legislation in the field of elections in 2011," as legislation was introduced in 34 states, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

Since the beginning of the 2011 legislative session, eight states have passed photo ID laws: Alabama, Kansas, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Wisconsin, Mississippi and Rhode Island. All but two were enacted by Republican legislatures and Republican governors.

Mississippi's law was passed by voter referendum placed on the ballot by a Democratic House and a Republican Senate. Rhode Island's law was enacted by a Democratic legislature and an independent governor.

This year, the Republican-controlled Virginia General Assembly and Senate passed a voter ID measure, which Republican Gov. Bob McDonnell is expected to sign. In Pennsylvania, the Republican-controlled House is expected to pass one of the toughest voter ID measures in the nation on Tuesday, the last step before it goes to Republican Gov. Tom Corbett, who plans to sign it.

The new photo ID requirements have become a point of contention in the 2012 elections. Liberal groups say the push for these requirements is led by Republicans aiming to disenfranchise people who tend to vote Democratic – African-Americans, Hispanics, the poor and college students.

"This is just another example of the misplaced priorities of the Obama administration," Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum said of the Justice Department objection. He commended Texas Gov. Rick Perry "and the many states like Texas that are fighting to ensure voter fraud does not impede the electoral process."

For the past three months, Attorney General Eric Holder has been especially vocal about voting rights. "We need election systems that are free from fraud, discrimination and partisan influence – and that are more, not less, accessible to the citizens of this country," the attorney general said recently in a speech at the Lyndon Baines Johnson Presidential Library and Museum in Austin, Texas.

Proponents of such legislation say the measures are needed to combat voter fraud. But advocacy groups for minorities and the poor argue there is no significant voter fraud.

Hans von Spakovsky, who headed Justice's civil rights division during the Republican administration of George W. Bush, has said one reason there is scant evidence of voter fraud is no one checks ID at the polls. "Nobody's saying it's large scale," but fraud could make a difference in close races, said von Spakovsky, a senior fellow at the conservative Heritage Foundation.

Of the Texas law, Assistant Attorney General Thomas E. Perez, head of Justice's civil rights division, wrote the Texas secretary of state: "I cannot conclude that the state has sustained its burden" of showing that the newly enacted law has neither a discriminatory purpose nor effect.

The Justice Department letter said that cost, travel distance and limited hours of operation for state offices will make it difficult for people to get state-issued photo ID cards. The letter said that if an applicant does not have the correct document to get a state-issued photo ID, the least expensive option would be to spend $22 on a copy of the voter's birth certificate.

Some of the photo ID measures have been similar to a model bill circulated by the American Legislative Exchange Council, a conservative organization whose corporate sponsors include Koch Industries, a privately held oil refining and pipeline conglomerate run by billionaire brothers David and Charles Koch. They are major contributors to Republican campaigns.

The department had been reviewing the Texas law and discussing it with state officials since last year. In January, Texas officials sued Holder, seeking a court ruling that the state's recently enacted voter ID law was not discriminatory in purpose or effect.

As a state with a history of voter discrimination, Texas is required under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act to get advance approval of voting changes from either the Justice Department or the U.S. District Court in Washington.

In December, the Justice Department rejected South Carolina's voter ID law on grounds it makes it harder for minorities to cast ballots. It was the first voter ID law to be rejected by the department in nearly 20 years.

In response, South Carolina sued Holder; the state argued that its new law will not disenfranchise any voters.

Like South Carolina and Texas, Alabama and Mississippi are covered by Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, so they will have to obtain approval from the Justice Department or the federal court here before their photo ID requirements can go in effect.

The Justice Department has said it is reviewing voter ID laws in other states not covered by Section 5, but the department has not identified them.

Last week in Wisconsin, a county judge imposed a temporary injunction suspending that state's photo ID requirement. Rhode Island's new photo ID requirement will not take effect until 2014.

The Justice Department most likely will take undertake a broader, more aggressive review over the next several months, said Jamie Chandler, a political science professor and election expert at Hunter College.

Justice's Texas letter drew familiar reactions from politicians and activists.

"Voter fraud undermines the electoral process and can sway the ultimate outcome of elections," said House Judiciary Committee Chairman Lamar Smith, R-Texas. "This is an abuse of executive authority and an affront to the citizens of Texas. It's time for the Obama administration to learn not to mess with Texas."

Texas's voter ID law "would prevent countless Latinos, African-Americans, elderly citizens and others from casting their ballot," said Katie O'Connor, an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union's voting rights project. "We're pleased the Department of Justice has recognized the harms this discriminatory law would have on people's fundamental right to vote."

Earlier on HuffPost:

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
Filed by Luke Johnson  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 18,850
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (237 total)
Jamgrae
Aliyah
12:05 PM on 04/22/2012
Ingenious...who would have thought that the conservativres were this smart...devious, yes...but this smart? They are attempting to destroy votes in the two areas that Obama will need to crush Romney......The African American vote and the Latino vote. They must have thought of this idea right after the 2008 election when Obama smashed McCain. The Republicans can make a legitiment argument about saying, "Well, you need an ID for anything, don't you?" That "logical" thinking will help them fix something that was never broken...because most cases of voter fraud are caused by officials and people who HAVE IDs to begin with. Their argument failed to understand that the idea is to get MORE people to vote...not LESS, and to make it easier for Americans to do this. Many people, like the elderly, who have lost their birth certificates will have a hard time in securing this ID card from the DMV. And as far as students, it will be up to their school boards if they will place expiration dates on those student cards (a requirement that the GOP says will make them valid for voting). Wouldn't it be ironic if all these GOP efforts to desenfranchise voters actually causes the opposite effect...and many conservatives don't get the chance to vote this year either? The Omish for instance (normally votes Republican) have religious issues on being photographed. And what of all those in the Appalachian mountains who may tend to vote conservative?
11:45 PM on 04/15/2012
The states regardless should proceed and simply prohibit voting without proof of US citizenship and stop the voting of anyone who cannot do so.The law should be put into effect disregarding any judges injunction and let the justice dept.take it to higher court while the States go about business fulfilling their obligations and laws to the citizens of the States that only citizens are going to vote.
Jamgrae
Aliyah
12:21 PM on 04/22/2012
But why spend the excess money to fix a problem that is non-existant? In most cases of voter fraud that the GOP are alleging, it has been from voter officials and others who HAVE an ID to begin with. The latest voter fraud conviction for example, was Charlie White, a Republican Secretary of the state of Indiana...and I'm sure he has an ID. Why deny millions of Americans the right to vote just to give some sort of an edge to a weak GOP presidential candidate? What of the long term effects of this law....it should be easier for citizens to vote, not harder. The Founding Fathers, and later the Civil Rights marchers fought and died for all Americans to be able to voice their opinion through the ballot box. These laws do nothing more than cause many to loose the enthusiasm to do this. I feel the GOP will regret these laws in the end and destroy the original intent of the Founding Fathers to get citizens out to take part in this important event.
11:38 PM on 04/15/2012
"We need election systems that are free from fraud, discrimination and partisan influence – and that are more, not less, accessible to the citizens of this country," the attorney general said
This is precisely why we need voter ID's to prevent fraud,in his own words. We need to be free from the partisian influence of obama and his liberal pack and press. And the States have all the authority in the world obliging them to be discriminate,a part of the virtue of prudence,in assuring us that only citizens of the US are voting.
The State should proceed regardless of holder and any judge's opinion.No proof of US citizenship then no vote at the voting booths.
To register to vote one must be a US citizen.Let them bring whatever proof they have that they are US citizens which they had to produce when they register to vote. So one must prove US citizeship in order to register and then ID at the time of voting of some kind.At a minimum what they had to produce when they proved they were US citizens.Those who have voter ID's so much the better and easier.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
milles manson
"Let us insert the microchip Or Go To Prisoncamp"
02:46 PM on 04/13/2012
the justice deparment is white biased and do not want to protect the civil rights of whites and go out of the way to investigate any civil rights violations against whites,yea,they have a anti white agenda.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
OOOOOMY
08:34 AM on 04/12/2012
Recently we all saw this video concerning voter ID:
James O'Keefe's Project Veritas Takes Voter Fraud Video Campaign To D.C. Polls (VIDEO)

Why does the Obama Administration persist in pushing this issue you think, even after The Supreme Court decisions have stated nothing at all wrong with showing photo. ID's
? Remember all the numerous complaints notably by Acorn in past...

FLASHBACK- Supreme Court upholds voter ID law Law justified to ... - AOL Search Results

FLASHBACK- Supreme Court upholds voter ID law Law justified to ..

Revisiting the Supreme Court's Rebuttal of Voter ID Detractors
The Supreme Court upheld a decision by the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, finding that “showing a free photo identification is not a significant increase over the usual voting burdens, and the State’s stated interests are sufficient to sustain that minimal burden.”
photo
novenator
Bold Progressive. Deal with it.
11:16 PM on 03/31/2012
These aren't "voter ID" laws, they are VOTER SUPPRESSION laws. They literally shred the fabric of democracy and have to be unapologetically called what they are.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
pezmusic
singer songwriter looks great in a cowboy hat
09:46 PM on 04/06/2012
Its cuts voter fraud...... in many places dead people vote.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
OOOOOMY
08:36 AM on 04/12/2012
I Guess your interpretation trumps members of The Supreme Court rulings?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Aslow
QUALITY CONTINUUM
03:38 PM on 03/28/2012
It has been announced that from now on a photo I.D. will be required to take the SAT college entrance exam. There are many things we do that require a photo I.D.. It has never been considered a burden until it has been proposed to use to insure voter validity. Democrats have a history of cheating in counting votes, e.g. Chicago Mayor Richard Daly, Texas Lyndon Johnson.. They say there is no evidence of voter fraud. How could there be? No one checks anything.
Jamgrae
Aliyah
12:37 PM on 04/22/2012
But there is evidence of voter fraud....a conviction of a Indiana Republican Secretary of State, Charlie White. An individual I'm sure who has an ID.
oil patch
if you voted obama, you are to blame
04:32 PM on 03/17/2012
they are requiring no more ID than the TSA does to get on a plane, explain that libs
Jamgrae
Aliyah
12:53 PM on 04/22/2012
It should be easier for Americans to vote than to get on a secured plane. The idea behind voting originally was to get MORE people to vote...not LESS. The idea around requiring an ID for a flight is to prevent terrorist activity....do you think terrorists are interested in voting in our elections? Many seniors will be unable to go through the process of voting this year because of the lack of a birth or marriage certificate lost long ago, thus, for the first time in years will be unable to vote. Many of the Omish, who tend to vote Republican, will have a problem with being photographed. Many students who vote either Rep. or Dem. may not vote as well if their student cards don't have expiration dates. And just how does "early voting" denial, a fix for voter fraud which is part of many of these voter restriction laws?
oil patch
if you voted obama, you are to blame
02:53 PM on 04/23/2012
so your okay with requiring ID to get on a plane but not to vote for someone who has authorization to launch nuclear missiles (and apparently now the power to wage war)? These seniors you talk about, how did they get their benefits without any ID?
05:20 PM on 04/26/2012
Most of your arguments are moot. A state-issued ID can be issued by the DMV. It is certainly no harder than getting into college. Thus, students have no excuse. Seniors typically have some form of ID by this stage of their lives because we've needed them for a very long time. You are assuming that all elderly people are forgetful, incompetent people. The Amish will likely have an exception made for them if it is truly against their religion to be photographed... which I doubt since I've seen pictures of them (common sense check).
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
emanonecafon
02:24 AM on 03/17/2012
Dems claim every citizen does not need an identification card just to be a citizen. But on the other hand dems claim every citizen must have health insurance and prove they have it with proper documentation. So, how is every citizen going to prove they have health insurance unless the have identifying documentation which could subsequently be used to obtain voter identification? If dems want to claim every citizen does not need identification then I suppose we can go ahead and overturn that ludicrous shenanigan they call Obamacare which requires every citizen to have identification.
Jamgrae
Aliyah
01:01 PM on 04/22/2012
A senior may use his social security card to get health insurance, but can no longer use it to vote...desenfranchising him/her for the first time in all the years they have voted. So for those Americans, their right to vote will be suppressed. And don't forget that the so-called ludicrous OBAMACARE was modelled after the ludicrous ROMNEYCARE, which started as a ludicrous Republican IDEA. A Republican idea that they fostered for 10 years before Obama came into office. When Obama embraced it for bi-partisanship, suddenly this BRIGHT Republican idea became LUDICROUS. Only in America.
10:18 AM on 03/15/2012
Voting is the right of US citizens! but we all know why the left wants to protect those who are not!! Votes, votes, votes! so we the taxpayers can continue to be burdened by the cost to take care of those who are in this country illegally. Why they are protected is a concept I just do not understand.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
WTH 2012
Tell Vlad I'm flexible
09:56 AM on 03/15/2012
What a monumental day... Holder gives Texas illegals the vote.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
09:26 AM on 03/15/2012
The only voters being suppressed by free voter ID cards are deaddems.
03:13 AM on 03/16/2012
@ "litwahf" = Brilliant insight.
03:19 AM on 03/16/2012
ERIC HOLDER as US Attorney General is absolutely DISGRACEFUL.

He is leaning toward protecting the criminalities of the elections - other than protecting the integrity of our vote.

From Wall Street Journal - "Holder's Racial Politics - The AG's attack on voter ID laws may backfire legally and politically".

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203391104577125532355717866.html
03:34 AM on 03/17/2012
and why hasn't he explained the Fast and Furious program? Can we expect that he didn't know--the czar of the US Attorney General? How can Americans accept this excuse that he didn't know? Guess he didn't read it in the paper!!! Yet, it didn't take him long to defend the Black Panthers blocking the voting the polling station or his investigation into the CIA regarding the treatment of radical Muslims.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Gene Patten
03:48 PM on 04/05/2012
Holder is the perfect example that afirmative action does not work!!!!!!!!!!
09:06 AM on 03/15/2012
Holder claims voter verification is disenfranchising groups of voters, yet he allows Black Panthers with billy clubs to stand guard at the entrance to polling stations.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jstanavgguy
Proud member of the evil 1%
12:56 AM on 03/15/2012
Well, more good news.

My home state just passed a Voter ID law. And the governor signed it immediately.

It makes provisions for those who do not have an ID to vote with a provisional ballot, and gives them 6 days to present a valid ID.

it makes provisions for FREE ID's for those who cannot afford them.

And it makes provisions for transportation for the elderly to get to the DMV to get an ID.

Finally, Pennsylvania is being turned around for the better.
photo
bigtimechillerm
Why does the left despise self-governance?
11:56 PM on 03/14/2012
Hispanics in Mexico have to show a photo ID to vote, are they disenfranchised there? Why is it that voting should have a lower threshold for identification than buying a beer, cashing a check or getting into a nightclub?