zoogs
New member
Great coverage from the LA Times. In 2013, the Supreme Court struck down a provision of the Voting Rights Act which subjected several states to federal 'preclearance', arguing that discrimination was over and such oversight was no longer necessary. Totally surprisingly ...
Texas is not alone among states' efforts to creatively influence elections. If the string of legal defeats continues, they will have nonetheless succeeded in their efforts for the 2014 elections, and may yet get their way in 2016.
The law was blocked in 2011, passed in 2013 thanks to the SCOTUS decision, struck down in 2014 -- with that decision being upheld in 2015 -- and yet, it is still in effect, pending the state's ongoing exhaustion of the appeals process.Hours after the Supreme Court in 2013 struck down a core part of the Voting Rights Act, Texas put into effect a law that threatened to disenfranchise more than 600,000 registered voters.
The Justice Department had blocked the law two years earlier as discriminatory, and a three-judge panel in Washington agreed that it put “unforgiving burdens on the poor.” Texans who lacked driver's licenses had to take certified copies of their birth certificates to motor-vehicle offices to obtain new photo ID cards, sometimes a trip of more than 100 miles.
Texas is not alone among states' efforts to creatively influence elections. If the string of legal defeats continues, they will have nonetheless succeeded in their efforts for the 2014 elections, and may yet get their way in 2016.
Last edited by a moderator: