Iowa Judge Joins Forces with Anti-Immigrant Congressman

Through his typo-ridden decision that declared illegal the presentation of voter information in any language other than English, Iowan Polk County District Judge Douglas Staskal joined the Civil Rights Rollback Hall of Shame.

On March 31st, Judge Staskal upheld the claim of petitioners that it was illegal for Iowa's Secretary of State to continue to prepare voter information in Spanish, Vietnamese, Laotian and Bosnian. (Note to Bosnian refugees, etc: Judge Staskal would like to remind you to please be fluent in English the exact instant you become eligible to vote; otherwise, no voting! Thanks!)

How much, you ask, did this practice of presenting multi-lingual voter information cost the state of Iowa? A whooping $630. No, not thousands: six hundred and thirty dollars.

Despite the low cost - and the recent reauthorization of the Voting Rights Act - printing voter information in non-English languages was found illegal in Iowa because of the 2002 Iowa English Language Reaffirmation Act. This Act states that all forms should be printed in English. The relentlessly unlawful Iowa Secretary of State decided that, in addition to printing all forms in English, it would aid democracy to also print those forms in a range of languages. Unless appealed, Judge Staskal's decision will end such a practice.

How does this weakening of democratic inclusion strike some? Well, according to the Des Moines Register, Craig Halverson, state director of the Iowa Minuteman Civil Defense Corps, was "elated by the judge's decision."

When a case this troubling comes along, it does us well to pause and consider from where the case came. And, thus, we introduce to you Republican U.S. Representative, Steve King, of Iowa, lead petitioner in the case. You may know Rep. King from his controversial comment that al-Qaeda would be "dancing in the streets," were Senator Obama to be elected President.

It turns out that the last few years have been busy ones for Rep. King. In 2006, King was a leader in the Republican efforts to block the renewal of the Voting Rights Act. Nothing if not consistent, King was opposed to the fact that the Act required bilingual ballots in districts where 5% of the public speaks a language other than English. May it be noted, his 2006 Voting Rights Act amendment efforts failed.

Bouncing back from his inability to rollback voting rights on a national level, King reappeared in the public eye just a month later. At this point, Rep. King took to the House floor and proposed that Congress should build an electrified fence on the border. King, on record as calling undocumented immigration, "a slow-rolling, slow-motion terrorist attack on the United States," then proceeded to build a miniature version of such a fence, in front of the House. King said of electrifying immigrants, "We do this with livestock all the time."

The electro-shock fence proposal failed to pass through Congress, leaving the Representative only his miniature version to play with at home.

Two defeats in a row, and Rep. King wasn't going to back down. After the July introduction of his fence idea, King sprung into action shortly before the November election in 2006. Incensed that the state of Iowa was presenting voter information in languages other than English on its website, despite the state's 2002 law ordering otherwise, King demanded that the information be taken down. Those forms remained online until just a few weeks ago, shortly after Judge Staskal's recent decision was announced.

King proves that right-wing attempts to rollback civil rights are far from dead. Even those crazy enough to propose an electrifying border fence can still have their agenda backed in the courts of this land. What happened in Iowa on March 31st isn't a solitary event. Creative, tenacious and well-funded, the right-wing agenda moves forward in courtrooms across this country.

Activist judges do exist, only they're actually right-wing, and their decisions, such as this one, often go under-reported.

If you want to join others in stopping the civil rights rollback, visit the National Campaign to Restore Civil Rights at our homepage, blog, Facebook, or YouTube channel.

Comments

[CelticMajic]

Judge Douglas Staskal is to be congratulated for upholding the law. We MUST have a single language.

[CommonSenseRules]

The rules are simple, but arrogance and entitlement have blurred them and made it acceptable to break the laws. All of them. So, it starts with breaking one law, coming into this country illegally, and it snowballs to multiple other laws being broken.

Come here legally, respect our laws, speak our language, pay your taxes, contribute to society, raise a good family and YOU ARE ALL WELCOME IN THIS GREAT COUNTRY!

[nivek]

With King it is not a matter of being a law and order guy perceived as a mean old racist, he's a mean old racist. When an Iowa congress member goes to a border state,attends a minute man pep rally and publicly ( Fox News) makes a statement that could potentially incite violence, that's racism.

[liberalghost]

Umm? Please explain how English langauge for voting is a violation of civil rights. Are federal and state governments denying English langauge education to legal immigrants?

[DexGor]

Actually, yes. There simply isn't enough funding. In MA, some 2,000 people a year take ESL classes, but there are 16,000 waiting to take it who can't because there isn't enough funding.

[Merg]

And are these all legal residents and citizens? I thought you had to have a knowledge of English to become a citizen.

[NABNYC]

English is the primary language in this country, and proficiency is a requirement for anyone wanting to become a citizen and gain the right to vote. I do not see any automatic benefit in having every single government publication translated into 50 languages. It costs money and it often is pointless. Particularly since you have many immigrants who are not literate in any language. As an aside, if you have a form printed in Vietnamese, for example, who is going to process the form if a Vietnamese speaker fills in information and submits the form? Who is going to speak to the person if they need help?

This is a much more important issue than the silly right-wing anti-Spanish idiots make it out to be. There are important reasons to have one national language. Read about the history of China if you have questions. But beyond that, should every government office be required to hire bilingual employees for every position? There is the a to society -- actual dollars as well as psychological cost -- of having a babylon society with too many people speaking too many different languages. It might be a necessary accommodation in some limited circumstances, but it should not be universally adopted without serious study.

[jdevienne]

Does the Iowa law say "all forms should be printed in English," or "all forms should be printed ONLY in English." In other words, is the judge rewriting the law (activist judge) or was it written that way in the first place (unenlightened legislature perhaps)?

[randyjet]

By the way, you DO have to be FLUENT in English to VOTE if you are an immigrant since it is a requirement of becoming a citizen. Of course, if you don't respect the laws on immigration why should you respect ANY other laws?

As a precinct chair and election judge in a mostly English speaking county, I can tell you it is a BIG expense and trouble and I am a bilingual aide for our area. I was all for the Voting Rights Act extention, but I think some modification should be made for bilingual requirements and should be left to local boards now. I can see no rational reason for translations in Laotian, and other languages that are non-native.
The initial reason for the bilingual requirements was that Texas did not require instruction in public schools to be in English only until 1917. Thus in 1965, a native born US citizen could have graduated from high school and never had to learn English and would only have been 65 at the time. Most of those folks are dead by now, thus very little need for this. At the time too, you had to be fluent in English to vote, which was the means for keeping Mexican-Americans from voting. There is no need for this requirement except in some areas and it should be local option.

[DexGor]

No, you don't have to be fluent. You have to know enough to get by. I know enough German to get by (I can read and write and speak a little), but lord knows I wouldn't want to have to do something as important as voting in German. Forcing me to do so would be disenfranchisement.

[BilCon]

One correction, although I agree with the meat of your comments.
You do not have to be fluent in English to become a US Citizen. You do, however, need to be proficient, which is almost the same thing, but not quite. While I am not completely fluent in Spanish, I am proficient.

[randyjet]

I have some news for you. I AM an old civil rights activist who participated in the movement when I was young, and even got to hear MLK in person too. In addition, I am a long time liberal, Vietnam era veteran, anti-war activist, and a proud member of the Minutemen Civil Defense Corps. One of my heroines is the late Barbara Jordan who chaired Clinton's commission on immigration. She had the same position on ILLEGAL immigration as I and the MCDC do. You should READ her remarks as she delivered the report to Congress.

It is telling that you and the pro-illegal immigration people have to LIE to make your case by saying that there is NO difference between illegal and legal immigrants. I am all for IMMIGRANTS, LEGAL ones. I am against ILLEGALS of any country or race. Just because there are nuts on this issue, hardly makes it less valid. The MCDC refuses to allow any racists or other Nazi types to be members. WE keep the nuts out, yet the pro-illegals EMBRACE the revanchists of MeCHA and La Raza. It is even WORSE when you do the same for the Chamber of Commerce which is as right wing as one can get.

[TXfemmom]

The judge and the Representatives are morons.

However, citizens immigrants are supposed to be able to read and write in English in order to obtain their citizenship, so why these citizens cannot read English to vote is a legitimate question. Legal residents, but not citizens, are not required to know English, but citizens, who are the only ones to vote should know English.

I am a progressive, but my experiences of late with Spanish speaking individuals in positions where English and knowlege of it are essential, has just fried me. I just stopped by my pharmacy and was greeted by an individual with a very thick Spanish accent, who could not understand what I was asking of her, and SHE HAD BEEN FILLING PRESCRIPTIONS, BECAUSE SHE HAD TO STOP TO COME AND WAIT ON ME. Believe me, reading doctors hand writing is not easy, but if one does not read or speak English very well.....STAY THE HELL AWAY FROM MY PHARMACEUTICALS.

[TuffPosh]

Odd, I'm pretty sure he's not "Anti-Immigrant". He simply supports our laws, which is apparently too much for some. It's also worth noting that in general those who become citizens are required to read, write, and speak English. And, one of those refugees would have gone through a long process before becoming eligible to vote. I also suggest reading the "terrorism" quote in context; even if his numbers are too high his point is still valid.

[TRUE BLUE AMERICAN]

Nice comment Posh.