The Voting Rights Project - The Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law - News Feed

Competing Redistricting Amendments In Florida

Wed, 16 Jun 2010 00:00:00 -0700

Every 10 years, Floridian lawmakers must redraw their congressional and legislative districts in response to population changes identified by the decennial census.

After collecting 1.7 million signatures, advocates of changing the redistricting process, FairDistrictsFlorida, have succeed in putting two proposed constitutional amendments on the ballot in November. The first of these, Amendment 5, would require that, “Legislative districts or districting plans…not be drawn to favor or disfavor an incumbent or political party. Districts shall not be drawn to deny racial or language minorities the equal opportunity to participate in the political process and elect representatives of their choice. Districts must be contiguous. Unless otherwise required, districts must be compact, as equal in population as feasible, and where feasible must make use of existing city, county and geographical boundaries.” Similarly, Amendment 6 states that, “Congressional districts or districting plans may not be drawn to favor or disfavor an incumbent or political party. Districts shall not be drawn to deny racial or language minorities the equal opportunity to participate in the political process and elect representatives of their choice. Districts must be contiguous. Unless otherwise required, districts must be compact, as equal in population as feasible, and where feasible must make use of existing city, county and geographical boundaries.”

In response to these amendments, Republican leadership in the State Legislature has proposed an alternative amendment, which will be Amendment 7. Amendment 7 would require the state to “apply federal requirements and balance and implement the standards in the State Constitution. The state shall take into consideration the ability of racial and language minorities to participate in the political process and elect candidates of their choice, and communities of common interest other than political parties may be respected and promoted, both without subordination to any other provision of Article III of the State Constitution.”

Some believe, as reported by Fred Grimm of the Miami Herald, that Amendments 4 and 5 “would repaint Picasso districts into compact, contiguous sane shapes and outlaw districts created to favor or harm political parties. And it would limit the outsized influence of Florida's political extremes.” Meanwhile, Mary Ellen Klas of the Miami Herald quotes Senator Mike Haridopolos defending amendment 7 as preventing the loss of “minority representation and mak[ing] sure that communities of interest are preserved when the districts are redrawn,” something he maintains the FairDistricts amendments would fail to accomplish. The arguments made by both sides of this battle highlight the considerations that will dominate the upcoming redistricting cycle.

New York Senate Passes Anti-Deceptive Practices Bill

Tue, 15 Jun 2010 00:00:00 -0700

On June 15, 2010 the New York State Senate passed S2554B, "The Deceptive Practices and Voter Intimidation Prevention Act," by a vote of 33-28. The Lawyers' Committee's New York Election Protection leadership played an important role in the bill's passage, working with the Senate on the legislation, testifying in front of the committee last year, and sending a letter of support on the eve of the vote.

"As leaders in the non-partisan Election Protection coalition, we have seen deception and intimidation used far too many times to keep certain voters from exercising their civic duty. The Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law applauds Senator Stewart-Cousins for her leadership on this issue. Now that the Senate has passed this important legislation we urge the Assembly to quickly do the same," said Tanya Clay House, public policy director for the Lawyers' Committee.

This legislation will provide the tools the State of New York needs to crack down on third-parties and individuals who attempt to keep voters away from the polling place through nefarious tactics, and quickly publicize corrective information so voters are not disenfranchised. The Lawyers' Committee will continue its push to ensure this important bill becomes law in New York and across the country.

Please click here to read the Lawyers' Committee's letter of support.

Please click here to read New York Election Protection's October 5, 2009 testimony.

Please click here to read the Passage Announcement issued by Senator Andrea Stewart-Cousins.

Please click here to read an article on the Bill published by the Hudson Valley Press Online.

Lawyers' Committee Legal Director Addresses Electoral and Campaign Finance Reform During Recent Panel Discussion, "How Broken is Our Democracy? And How Should We Fix It?"

Fri, 04 Jun 2010 00:00:00 -0700

Lawyers' Committee Legal Director Jon Greenbaum joined other leading experts and advocates during a June 1st conference co-sponsored by Demos, AmericaSpeaks, Everyday Democracy, the Ash Center for Democratic Governance and Innovation at Harvard Kennedy School and the Brookings Institution to discuss electoral and campaign finance reform.

Mr. Greenbaum and fellow panelists discussed ways in which our electoral and campaign finance systems must be reformed in order to have a truly representative democracy that reflects the will of the whole populace, and how the movements for electoral and campaign reform can work with other parts of the democracy movement and with government to achieve these goals.

Other Panelists:
Nick Nyhart, Public Campaign
Eddie Hailes, Advancement Project
Clarissa Martinez De Castro, National Council of La Raza
(Moderator: Karen Hobert Flynn, Common Cause)

Please click here for a summary of the event and to hear audio of this panel and other portions of the half-day conference.

South Carolina House Passes Voter ID Bill

Mon, 24 May 2010 00:00:00 -0700

On May 5, 2010, despite strenuous objections of Democratic members, Republican Representatives of South Carolina’s General Assembly pushed a bill through the House that would require voters to present a photo-ID prior to voting. The paper reported: “House Republicans are hailing the bill as a way to make voting more convenient while simultaneously protecting elections from voter fraud by requiring identification. But Democrats say the bill is a knee-jerk reaction to the success of national Democrats during the 2008 election, including President Barack Obama’s win. They also claim the bill is an effort to lessen the number of eligible voters, particularly the elderly, the poor and African-Americans — all of whom are less likely to have photo IDs.”

On May 11^th, after the bill was first passed by the Senate and then amended by the House, the Senate refused to pass the new version of the bill and sent notification of that decision back to the House. The following day, after the House insisted that the proposed amendments stand, a conference committee was formed with Representatives Clemmons, Cato, and Mitchell and Senators Malloy, Campsen, and Shoopman. The South Carolina Election Reform Act Bill currently resides in that conference committee.

You can read the rest of The State’s article quoted above by clicking here. To learn more about the version of the bill that Republicans in the House support, you can also read posts by Representatives Nielson, Gunn, and Clemmons here, here, and here, respectively.

Lawyer's Committee Letter of Opposition to Missouri's HJR 64 and HB 1966

Mon, 03 May 2010 00:00:00 -0700

Lawyers' Committee Comment Letter to DOJ

Wed, 28 Apr 2010 00:00:00 -0700

Lawyers' Committee Challenges Voter Eligibility Standards in Virginia

Wed, 14 Apr 2010 00:00:00 -0700

Settlement Agreement Reached in Harkless v. Brunner

Tue, 15 Dec 2009 00:00:00 -0800

The Lawyers' Committee and its co-counsel reached a settlement agreement on November 25 in a major lawsuit, Harkless v. Brunner, brought under Section 7 of the National Voter Registration Act against the Ohio Secretary of State and the Director of the Ohio Department of Jobs and Family Services ("DJFS"). The plaintiffs in the case were Lorain resident Carrie Harkless, Cleveland resident Tameca Mardis, and the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN).

At the time the Harkless lawsuit was filed in 2006, neither the Secretary of State (who at that time was Kenneth Blackwell) nor the DJFS Director was actively working to ensure that county DJFS offices were offering voter registration to their public assistance clients, as they are specifically required to do under the NVRA, and county DJFS offices were registering only a small fraction of their clients.

The Harkless case will have a significant positive impact on the state's voters. Ohio has a large number of public assistance clients, and the settlement will integrate voter registration directly into the benefits application and recertification process, as well as institute broad-ranging training, reporting and oversight procedures. We expect the settlement to result in more than 100,000 Ohio citizens registering to vote or updating their voting information each year through this process. . On top of that, the Secretary will designate the Department of Veterans Affairs programs for homeless veterans as a voter registration agency, and work with the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction to encourage voter registration among recently released offenders.

This case will also have a broad-reaching impact in other states. During the course of the case the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals decided in our favor that the state officials were responsible for ensuring NVRA compliance by the county DJFS offices. State officials will no longer have any question - ensuring voters are effectively registered through social service agencies IS their responsibility.

This settlement is the result of a years-long effort with a coalition that also included co-counsel from Demos and Project Vote, to increase compliance with the public assistance registration requirements of the NVRA. Dechert LLP served as pro bono counsel in this case. Although we attempt to achieve this goal without litigation we are prepared to file suit if needed. In 2008 we won a preliminary injunction against Missouri state officials that led to a phenomenal increase in the number of public assistance registrations (from 8,000 a year to more than 150,000 in just one year). Our coalition recently filed similar cases in New Mexico and Indiana.

Moving Voter Registration Toward a Digital Democracy

Fri, 11 Dec 2009 00:00:00 -0800

Yesterday, the Lawyers' Committee submitted a response to an open public notice from the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) titled "Moving Toward a Digital Democracy." Based on our experience as the leader of the Election Protection coalition, the largest non-partisan voter protection effort in the country, the Lawyers' Committee focused on the pressing need to upgrade and modernize the process of voter registration nationwide.

In the letter, signed by Legal Director Jon Greenbaum, the Lawyers' Committee explained:

Our registration system is outdated in several respects including its overreliance on paper forms. These handwritten registration forms may be illegible, and can result in data entry errors and redundancies. An influx of voter registration forms strains election administrators during the critical period leading up to Election Day, causing other duties to fall by the wayside. Additionally, these paper forms are expensive to print, expensive to mail and expensive to constantly update through manual data entry.

By the very nature of this system, certain voters have a more difficult time registering to vote - the very first step in the democratic process. Americans who move, those who change names because of a marriage or divorce, students and members of our military who move frequently or serve overseas all face significant barriers to voter registration.

The letter goes on to answer specific questions from the FCC regarding online voter registration. To read the Lawyers' Committee's responses, click here.

Ohio House Passes Election Reform Bill

Thu, 19 Nov 2009 00:00:00 -0800

In an article today, The Columbus Dispatch reports on the Ohio House passing a bill that would change "virtually all aspects of the voting process."

The bill addresses numerous concerns from the past elections, among them modernizing the voter registration system to include an automatic update of records when voters change their name or address, expanding the number of early voting sites, easing voter ID requirements, and streamlining provisional balloting process.

According to the article, the proponents of the bill argue that it "continues efforts to improve elections since the problems Ohio experienced in the 2004 presidential election."

Having passed through the Democrat-controlled House, the bill is now in the Republican-controlled Senate, which has been considering its own election reform proposals. Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner said she is hopeful that both chambers can "find some common ground and move at least some of these reforms forward," so that the changes can be incorporated in time for the 2010 primary.

Click here to read the full article.

Civil Rights Groups Seek International Help on Felony Voting

Wed, 30 Sep 2009 00:00:00 -0700

The Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law partnered with the American Civil Liberties Union and the Sentencing Project to request that the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights carry out a comprehensive review of the effect of felony disenfranchisement laws on racial and ethnic minorities in the United States and other countries in the Americas. The Request which was filed in early September garnered the support of scores of organizations and asserts that felony disenfranchisement laws, policies and practices violate the right to vote free from discrimination under the American Declaration on the Rights and Duties of Man and the American Convention on Human Rights. Click here to read the Request and learn more about how the implementation of felony disenfranchisement laws disproportionately affect the voting rights of minorities and marginalized populations.

Click here for the National Law Journal/Legal Times article.

Indiana Court of Appeals Strikes Down Burdensome Voter Identification Law

Thu, 17 Sep 2009 00:00:00 -0700

On Thursday, September 17, 2009, the Court of Appeals of Indiana unanimously decided in League of Women Voters v. Rokita that Indiana's government-issued photo identification requirement for most in-person voters violates the Indiana Constitution's Equal Privileges and Immunities Clause. The voter identification law required that those voting in person present photo identification issued by the government before being allowed to vote. The law exempted those casting absentee ballots and those who resided at state licensed care facilities where polling places were located.

The law has disproportionately affected minority, poor, and elderly voters, including a dozen elderly nuns who were prevented from voting in Indiana's 2008 primary as documented in our Election Protection program. The Indiana Court of Appeals ruled that the law unreasonably treated those voting in person differently than those voting by absentee balloting by making it more difficult to vote in person. The court cited a previous Indiana Supreme Court decision that upheld more stringent laws for absentee balloting on the grounds that absentee ballots - not in person ballots - were more susceptible for fraud and abuse. The court also held that the decision to exempt individual s living in state licensed care facilities where polling places were located granted an unequal privilege to those residents. The Indiana Court of Appeals did reject a challenge to the law on the grounds that it created a new qualification for voting rather than a mere regulation.

The Court of Appeals has ordered that the trial court enter an order declaring that the entire law be declared void because its unconstitutional elements could not be excised. The Court of Appeals decision is now subject to an appeal to the Indiana Supreme Court. The controversial Indiana voter identification law had previously been upheld against a facial challenge to its constitutionality by the U.S. Supreme Court in Crawford v. Marion County Election Bd.

Click here for Opinion.

Lawyers' Committee Partners with ACLU and Sentencing Project to File Felony Disenfranchisement Petition

Wed, 09 Sep 2009 00:00:00 -0700

The Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law has partnered with the American Civil Liberties Union and the Sentencing Project to request that the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights carry out a comprehensive review of the effect of felony disenfranchisement laws on racial and ethnic minorities in the United States and other countries in the Americas. The Request which was filed today and garnered the support of scores of organizations, asserts that felony disenfranchisement laws, policies and practices violate the right to vote free from discrimination under the American Declaration on the Rights and Duties of Man and the American Convention on Human Rights. Click here to read the Request and learn more about how the implementation of felony disenfranchisement laws disproportionately affect the voting rights of minorities and marginalized populations.

Lawyers' Committee Urges Federal Court to Enjoin Implementation of Georgia's Discriminatory Registration Program

Tue, 08 Sep 2009 00:00:00 -0700

On Friday, September 4, 2009, the Lawyers' Committee (along with its coalition partners) urged a federal court in Georgia to issue an injunction preventing the state of Georgia from implementing its discriminatory citizenship verification program for voter registration. On May 29, 2009, the Department of Justice found that the program will have a discriminatory effect on minority voters, and so denied preclearance to the program under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act (the Lawyers' Committee and its coalition partners wrote to the Department on May 19, 2009 urging the Department to determine that the program is discriminatory). Contrary to Section 5, the State implemented its verification program without first obtaining preclearance from either the Justice Department or the federal trial court in Washington, D.C. The Lawyers' Committee argues in its September 4 motion that the federal court in Georgia should order the state to stop any further use of the program since, in light of the Justice Department's May 29 determination, it is clear that the State has not received the required Section 5 preclearance for the program. The Lawyers' Committee also argues that the court should require Georgia to allow those persons to register to vote who previously sought to register and have been prevented from registering by the illegal implementation of the verification program, so long as these individuals are otherwise eligible to register to vote under Georgia law.

Click here for the Lawyers' Committee's Memorandum.

Voter Registration Modernization is Gaining Momentum!

Mon, 31 Aug 2009 00:00:00 -0700

A bipartisan group of officials, including former Senators Thomas A. Daschle and John C. Danforth, as well as Trevor Potter, former general counsel for John McCain's presidential campaign and Mark Elias, lead lawyer for Al Franken's 2008 recount, have come together in support of modernizing our antiquated voter registration system. The Lawyers' Committee applauds the Committee to Modernize Voter Registration's support of this critical reform.

Our cumbersome and outdated voter registration system was the single biggest cause of voter disenfranchisement we saw during the 2008 elections. Modernizing our system to one that automatically register every eligible American to vote when they turn 18 or become citizens, moves when they move, and has a system of Election Day correction will ensure that no voter is disenfranchised due to registration problems outside of her control. Voter Registration Modernization (VRM) will especially help the highly mobile, such as students and members of the military and their families. Modernizing the system will eliminate the tremendous burden on election officials caused by the last minute deluge of applications for voter registration. VRM will also help restore confidence in our democracy because the current hodgepodge of rules and regulations leaves the system vulnerable to fraud and manipulation.

The Washington Post ran an editorial today praising the initiative:

It's significant that different types of people -- not just academicians or election officials -- are agreeing on the drawbacks of the current, voter-initiated system of registration. Those drawbacks are legion: blocking many voters (an estimated 2 million in 2008) from casting ballots; relying on the often-erratic efforts of third parties to register voters; diverting local election officials from more critical tasks.

Modernizing our voter registration system will help all of us. With registration modernization we can streamline the process, eliminate paperwork, and reduce the frequency in which voters have to engage the system. This simple upgrade will save states and localities millions of dollars in materials and labor, and will free up resources for other critical election needs. Additionally, eliminating the deluge of registration forms allow election officials to focus on effectively administering elections.

For more news coverage of the Committee to Modernize Voter Registration:

Lawyers' Committee Urges DOJ to Reject Georgia's Discriminatory Registration Program

Sat, 29 Aug 2009 00:00:00 -0700

On Friday, August 29, 2009, the Lawyers' Committee (along with its coalition partners) urged the Department of Justice (DOJ) to continue to block the efforts of the Georgia Secretary of State to implement a discriminatory voter registration verification program that threatens to disenfranchise numerous persons eligible to vote in Georgia. On May 29, 2009, DOJ used its authority under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act to prevent Georgia from implementing its discriminatory program. The Secretary now has asked DOJ to reconsider and withdraw that objection, and to grant Section 5 preclearance to a modified verification program. Our August 29 letter notes that the Secretary has not provided any basis on which DOJ may withdraw the objection, since the Secretary has not indicated any way in which DOJ misapplied the law or misinterpreted the relevant facts in its May 29 ruling. Further, the letter argues that the modified program also is discriminatory, and should therefore also be blocked by DOJ under Section 5, because it continues to rely on all the elements of the predecessor program that made that program discriminatory. The Secretary of State's efforts to implement a discriminatory voter registration verification program is the subject of an ongoing lawsuit filed by the Lawyers' Committee (and its coalition partners). Morales v. Handel (N.D. Ga.).

To download our comment letter to the Department of Justice, click here.

Lawyers' Committee Fights for Student's Voting Rights in Virginia

Fri, 28 Aug 2009 00:00:00 -0700

The Lawyers' Committee has been an active member of the Virginia State Board of Elections Task Force on Residency, fighting to ensure students across the Commonwealth will not be prevented from registering to vote where they go to school. During last year's historic elections, ambiguity in Virginia's residency requirements made it difficult for students to register to vote in several jurisdictions across the state.

Last year, several county registrars across Virginia rejected registrations that contained a dorm address, sent out intimidating questionnaires, and raised questions about whether registering to vote would put students' financial aid in jeopardy or change their tax status. In response to these problems the Virginia General Assembly instructed the State Board of Elections to convene a Task Force on Residency to develop uniform implementation of residency rules across the Commonwealth.

The Lawyers' Committee is represented on the Task Force by Peggy Sanner, an attorney with Reed Smith LLP and a leader in the Lawyers' Committee's Virginia Election Protection program. The Taskforce developed a set of proposed regulations that were submitted to the State Board of Elections on August 10. While we have been honored to participate in this process and believe the proposed regulations are a significant and positive achievement, the Lawyers' Committee believes the proposed regulations can be modified to better achieve the goals of the Taskforce. To further influence the process the Lawyers' Committee submitted a comment letter to the state board detailing our additional recommendations. The letter proposes three changes that would make the regulations even more effective, including the removal of language that suggests residency is contingent on future plans, procedures to deal with situations where a person's physical place of abode does not have an address (for example, some students live in dormitories that are not assigned a street address), and how to deal with registrants who do not have a mailing address.

A public hearing will take place at the state capitol today, August 28.

To download the Lawyers' Committee's letter, click here.

Advocating for Election Reform in Pittsburgh

Mon, 17 Aug 2009 00:00:00 -0700

Voting Rights Project Campaign Manager, Eric Marshall, moderated a panel on modernizing our nation's antiquated voter registration system at the 2009 Netroots Nation convention in Pittsburgh, PA on Saturday, August 15, 2009. In its fourth year, Netroots Nation is a national gathering of progressive leaders and activists that "inspire[s] action and serve as an incubator for ideas that challenge the status quo and ultimately affect change in the public sphere."

Marshall's panel, "Repairing Our Democracy: Voter Registration Modernization and Other Solutions," featured Debra Bowen, Secretary of State for California, Dean Logan, Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk, Jonah Goldman, Vice President at the Glover Park Group, and Justin Levitt, Counsel at the Brennan Center for Justice.

The panel featured a lively discussion about the problems voters and election officials faced during last year's historic elections. One thing all the panelists agreed on, our cumbersome paper-based registration system consumed too much resources, money and staff time, led to the disenfranchisement of too many eligible Americans, and is bad need of reform.

For more information please visit our Voter Registration Modernization page.

Lawyers' Committee and Partners File 2 Major Voter Registration Lawsuits

Thu, 09 Jul 2009 00:00:00 -0700

Citing clear evidence that hundreds of thousands of low-income Indiana and New Mexico residents have illegally been denied the opportunity to register to vote, the Lawyers' Committee and its partners filed lawsuits on Thursday, July 9, 2008 against officials in both states for violations of the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (NVRA).

In addition to its better known "motor voter" provisions, the NVRA mandates that states must provide voter registration opportunities to applicants for public assistance such as Food Stamps, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, and Medicaid. Despite hundreds of thousands of participants in these programs, the states have each been averaging only 100-200 registrations per month through agencies covered under the NVRA.

Indiana has one of the worst registration rates for low-income voters in the nation. In 2008 over 40 percent of low-income voters in Indiana remained unregistered, representing almost 265,000 citizens from households making less than $25,000 a year.

In New Mexico, according to the most recent EAC report, only 2,765 voter registration applications were received through Motor Vehicle Division (MVD) sites during 2007-2008. These numbers are woefully inadequate, especially considering that states with a comparable population routinely register substantially more people through their motor vehicle offices. An astonishing 80% of MVD offices were found to be violating the NVRA, and investigations showed that MVD staff often were unaware of, or were misinformed about, their responsibilities under the NVRA.

This dismal performance indicates both Indiana and New Mexico's state governments are shirking their responsibilities and putting the burden on third-party groups to help register low-income people.

In Indiana, the suit was filed on behalf of the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN), the Indiana State Conference of the NACCP, and Paris Alexander, an Indiana resident and Food Stamp Program client who was not provided the opportunity to register to vote. The plaintiffs are represented by lawyers from the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, Project Vote, Dēmos, the NAACP, and the ACLU of Indiana, and by the law firms of Miner, Barnhill & Galland and Schwartz, Lichten, & Bright. Defendants include officials from Indiana's Family and Social Services Administration (FSSA), the co-directors of the Indiana Election Division, and the members of the Indiana Election Commission.

The New Mexico complaint was filed on behalf of the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN), and on behalf of four New Mexico residents who were denied the opportunity to register to vote when they went to a state agency to obtain public assistance benefits or obtain a driver's license or state identification card. The plaintiffs are represented by voting rights groups the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, Project Vote, and Dēmos, as well as by the laws firms of Freedman Boyd Hollander Goldberg & Ives, DLA Piper U.S., and Schwartz, Lichten and Bright. Defendants named in the suit include New Mexico's Secretary of State, Mary Herrera, and officials from the New Mexico Human Services Department (HSD), the New Mexico Motor Vehicle Division, and the New Mexico Taxation and Revenue Department.

The Lawyers' Committee was involved in a similar lawsuit in the State of Missouri, which settled last month. As a result, voter registration applications skyrocketed from fewer than 8,000 a year to more than 100,000 in just eight months. [For more about the Missouri case, click here.] This success on behalf of Missouri voters is astounding - if every state registered its public assistance clients at the rate Missouri has since last year's court order, several million citizens would be registered through public assistance agencies every year instead of the few hundred thousand that are now being registered.

Click below for press releases:
Click below for legal materials:
- The Indiana complaint.
- The New Mexico complaint.
Click here for more information about the Missouri NVRA case.
Click here for more information about the NVRA.

Lawyers' Committee Legal Director Quoted in Kansas City Star

Fri, 26 Jun 2009 00:00:00 -0700

The Lawyers' Committee's Jon Greenbaum was quoted in the Kansas City Star today discussing the settlement reached with the state over its implementation of the National Voter Registration Act, "‘The lawsuit has led to a 2,000 percent increase in the number of people registering to vote at Missouri public assistance agencies,' Greenbaum said. ‘We appreciate that since they've been under court order, Missouri's Department of Social Services has been a national model in showing how to implement this law.'"

Click here to read the full article.

Bipartisan Support for Voter Registration Modernization

Thu, 25 Jun 2009 00:00:00 -0700

The former general counsels to the Obama and McCain presidential campaigns, Bob Bauer and Trevor Potter, published a forceful op-ed in support of modernization our nation's antiquated voter registration system today in the Washington Post.

Bauer and Potter experienced first-hand the havoc our paper-based voter registration system can wreak on elections through their work during last year's historic campaign:

As adversaries, we disagreed passionately about many issues. Our roles in the campaign, however, were often similar; each of us was responsible for guiding our candidates and campaigns through the overly complex gantlet of election administration. Those experiences led us to an inescapable conclusion: Bringing our voter registration system into the 21st century must be the priority for improving the election process.

The Lawyers' Committee has been a leader in the push to modernize our voter registration system. We will continue to use our experience from Election Protection to push for common sense reforms that help achieve the goal of equal access to the ballot box for all. Today's support for voter registration modernization from two former adversaries is a clear sign that leaders from both sides of the aisle recognize the urgent need for registration reform.

Click here to read the full op-ed, "A New Page for Voting."

Settlement in Missouri is a Victory for Low-Income Voters

Thu, 25 Jun 2009 00:00:00 -0700

In a victory for low-income voters, the Lawyers' Committee and its partners reached a settlement with the state of Missouri that will continue a program that has already resulted in over 100,000 new voter registrations collected at public assistance agencies in just a few months. With this settlement, Missouri takes a giant step towards fulfilling the promise of the National Voter Registration Act of 1993.

The Lawyers' Committee with our pro bono counsel Dewey & LeBoeuf, Demos, Project Vote, and the local counsel Arthur Benson & Associates filed suit in April of last year on behalf of the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now and St. Louis resident Dionne O'Neal charging widespread violations of the NVRA. United States District Judge Nanette K. Laughrey had previously issued a preliminary injunction in July 2008 directing the Missouri Department of Social Services to immediately comply with the NVRA's requirement that DSS offices provide voter registration applications and assistance to their clients.

Missouri's turnaround since the court order is an unabashed success. If every state registered its public assistance clients at the rate Missouri has since last year's court order, several million citizens would be registered through public assistance agencies every year instead of the few hundred thousand that are now being registered. The Lawyers' Committee hopes that DSS will relate its experiences to its counterparts in the other states.

As a result of the settlement, DSS is required to:

Provide monthly to the plaintiffs' counsel detailed data on the numbers of persons visiting DSS offices, their responses to voter registration inquiries, the numbers of voter registrations completed and submitted to local election authorities, and other key information;
Designate a NVRA coordinator at each local DSS office as well as a statewide DSS coordinator;
Mandate that employees receive training in voter registration duties using a uniform training program;
Evaluate voter registration compliance as part of employee and office evaluation; and
Provide voter registration applications with regular mailings to clients and in connection with transactions by phone or internet, and to follow up with clients to provide voter registration services whenever it determines that a particular individual was not offered voter registration during a benefits transaction.

For more information:

Read the press release

Read the settlement agreement

Why the Voting Rights Act Matters

Tue, 16 Jun 2009 00:00:00 -0700

Why the Voting Rights Act Matters

On the eve of the Supreme Court's ruling on the constitutionality of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, the New York Times highlighted the Lawyers' Committee's recent victory in Georgia as evidence to why the law is so vital. At the end of May, the Department of Justice used Section 5 to block changes Georgia made to its voter registration verification program that would have disenfranchised countless eligible voters.

Section 5 requires jurisdictions with a history of discrimination to "pre-clear" all changes in their voting rules and has been an important tool in the fight for equal access to the ballot box for all eligible Americans. As the editorial, "Why the Voting Rights Act Matters," rightly noted, if the Supreme Court were to strike down Section 5 it would, "be a radical reversal for the court, which has repeatedly upheld the act since its passage in 1965," and would "cripple the power of Congress and the Justice Department to protect voters from discriminatory state rules."

Because Section 5 was in place, the Lawyers' Committee and its coalition partners were able to prevent this law from being enacted before last November's elections and helped ensure thousands of Georgians weren't disenfranchised through no fault of their own. However, the Court strikes down Section 5, these types of rule changes will be difficult to discover, and a valuable enforcement tool will be taken away from DOJ and civil rights organizations.

The editorial concludes by stating:

Foes of the Voting Rights Act argue that it is a relic of a previous era. The Justice Department's welcome decision to block the Georgia voting procedures shows that the act continues to provide much-needed protection for minority voters.

The Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law could not agree more.

Click here to read the New York Times editorial.

For more information on this case, please the Lawyer's Committee's Morales v. Handel web page.

DOJ Blocks Discriminatory Georgia Voter Registration Verification Program

Mon, 01 Jun 2009 00:00:00 -0700

On Friday, May 29, 2009, the Department of Justice (DOJ), using the authority granted under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, blocked changes Georgia made to its voter registration verification program that would have disenfranchised countless eligible voters in a letter sent to Georgia Attorney General Thurbert Baker. Under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, Georgia is required to submit new voting procedures for federal review before they are implemented. DOJ's ruling is a victory for Georgia's voters, one that the Lawyers' Committee and its partners have fought hard to ensure.

The rules at hand would have instituted two sets of discriminatory procedures. The first rule, the so called "no-match no-vote rule," rejected voter registration applications if the drivers' license or Social Security information on the application forms did not match the Department of Driver Services (DDS) or Social Security Administration databases. As noted by the Department of Justice, recent deposition testimony by state employees from the lawsuit Morales v. Handel, which initially blocked the use of the program, showed that an error as simple as transposing a number on a driver's license could lead to an erroneous non-match and the rejection of legitimate applications. Moreover, African-Americans comprised the majority of registrants flagged under this faulty matching program.

The second rule checked applicants' records in the DDS database for citizenship status. If it indicated they were a non-citizen, the applicants would not be registered to vote unless they provided proof of citizenship to the registrar. The problem with this system is that DDS does not automatically update citizenship status when individuals become naturalized citizens. This faulty match led to the erroneous rejection of more than half of the 7,007 individuals caught up by the system - including one in seven who were actually born in this country. Thousands of legitimate U.S. citizens - many Latino and Asian-American - received letters that government matches found they were not a citizen. This is an intimidating process and may have discouraged many from taking part in last year's historic elections.

Georgia first implemented these procedures last fall without seeking Section 5 preclearance. After Georgia Election Protection learned of the citizenship check in meetings with local election officials, we brought the issue to DOJ's attention and filed suit against the Secretary of State in the Northern District of Georgia, Morales v. Handel, on the grounds that Georgia had implemented voting changes without Section 5 preclearance. The three-judge district court panel blocked implementation of the procedures pending preclearance, and the state submitted the changes to DOJ. The Lawyers' Committee and our partners were active during the preclearance process, sending two letters to DOJ, the first urging them to seek more information and the second urging them to reject the rules. During both the preclearance process and in discovery in Morales, a great deal of information came to light that these procedures contained serious flaws that led to the disenfranchisement of a disproportionate number of minorities. For these reasons, DOJ issued a Section 5 objection.

Click here to read the DOJ's letter rejecting Georgia's voter registration verification program.

Click here to read to coalition's press release.

For more information on this case, please visit our Morales v. Handel web page.

Lawyers' Committee Urges DOJ to Object to Discriminatory Georgia Law

Fri, 22 May 2009 00:00:00 -0700

On May 19, the Voting Rights Project submitted a comment letter to the U.S. Department of Justice urging the Attorney General to file an objection under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act to Georgia's program for verifying the citizenship and identities of certain voter registration applicants. The letter explains how Georgia's program improperly and unnecessarily reduces the opportunities for African-American, Hispanic and Asian-American citizens to register and vote in Georgia. The letter also argues that Georgia has not shown that its verification program lacks a racially discriminatory purpose. The Section 5 submission is related to an ongoing lawsuit against Georgia Secretary of State Karen Handel in which the Voting Rights Project and co-counsel represent the plaintiffs.

This is the second letter the Lawyers' Committee has sent to the Department of Justice on this matter. Following last November's election, the Voting Rights Project and several other key partners submitted a comment letter to urging the department to request more information before taking action.

Click here for the May 19 letter.

Click here for the November 25 letter.

Click here for more information on the ongoing lawsuit against Secretary of State Handel.