Historic Change Again On the Horizon in Mississippi
October 9, 2020
By Tamikia Carr Vasquez
Mississippi, historically a hotbed of racial hostility between whites and blacks, is once again on the cusp of change. In June, the Mississippi legislature voted to remove the Confederate battle emblem from the state’s flag. In November, voters will have the opportunity to vote on removing the “Mississippi Plan” from the state constitution. This 1890 Jim Crow era provision states that to win certain statewide offices, a candidate must win the majority of the popular vote and win a majority of Mississippi’s 122 House districts. The Mississippi Center for Justice is on the forefront of leading the effort to abolish this procedure. In 2019, the Center worked on a federal lawsuit against the state. I recently spoke with Vangela M. Wade, President and CEO of the Center, about the background of the current electoral process, the prospects of the success of the referendum, and other election law issues facing Mississippi. This is part 1 of a two-part interview.
The Drop Box Dilemma: A Push to Expand Access To Voting in Ohio
October 9, 2020
By Nicholas Matuszewski
As with most states, Ohio has seen a number of election law cases this year centered around the COVID-19 Pandemic. One of these cases is Ohio Democratic Party v. LaRose. In late August, the Ohio Democratic Party and Lewis Goldfarb submitted a formal complaint in the Ohio Court of Common Pleas, Franklin County, against Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose.
The complaint alleged that LaRose erred when he decided that the state would use secure drop boxes to facilitate the return of marked absentee ballots but prohibited the placement of the drop boxes in any location other than the county board election offices. The plaintiffs argue that state law does not prohibit placing these drop boxes in locations other than the county board election offices. For that reason, and because many Ohio voters do not live near their county board election offices, the plaintiffs believe that LaRose should allow for more drop boxes in different locations.
After a Stormy Primary Season, New York Builds a Levee. But Will it Hold?
October 7, 2020
By Blake Vaisey
To say that New York’s primary election season this summer didn’t go well would be an understatement. Starting with a failed attempt to cancel the state presidential primary, the state faced a slew of issues regarding a huge influx of absentee ballot requests, an increase of 655% since the 2018 general election. Thousands of ballots were disqualified due to the state’s requirements for absentee ballots, with issues such as missing a dated postmark or misplaced signatures being the main causes of ballots being disqualified. Even issues outside of the control of the voter, such as damage caused by the post office, could result in the ballot being disqualified. These issues were compounded by the fact that a reported 34,000 absentee ballots were not mailed out to voters until one day before the primary.
Footing the Bill: The FRRC’s Fight for Florida Felons
October 7, 2020
By Nicholas Balbontin
“Past mistakes should not define a person’s future.”
These words, tweeted from the Florida Rights Restoration Coalition (FRRC) in 2019, have become a rallying cry for those Americans attempting to fight for felons’ right to vote in Florida. ” FRRC was founded bv returning citizerns and is “dedicated to ending the disenfranchisement and discrimination against people with conviction.”
The Eleventh Circuit’s decision to uphold Fla. Stat. § 98.0751 has been widely covered across blogs, articles, and general media. The court upheld Fla. Stat. § 98.0751(2)(a)(5)(b), stating that even when a returning citizen has completed the imprisonment portion of his sentence, he has not fully completed his sentence until all fines and fees are paid. The decision not only sparked controversy but increased the urgency of voting rights restoration efforts as the upcoming presidential election approaches. In an incredibly lengthy, 6-4 split opinion, the majority cited the lack of a suspect class as the main reason behind its holding of no equal protection violation. Without a suspect class in question to elicit strict scrutiny, the court turned to rational basis review. Through this lens, the State was found to have had a rational interest in ensuring that its convicted felons completed the entirety of their sentence. This presents a barrier to restoration for those returning citizens who face financial hardship and are unable to pay off these fines and fees.
Election 2020: Tennessee Slow to Protect Voters
October 5, 2020
By Maxwell Weiss
Tennessee is among a waning list of states attempting to increase voting restrictions during the pandemic. Many states have changed their election laws to allow any voter to vote using an absentee ballot. However, the Volunteer State is one of five states without no-excuse absentee voting this November, despite the significant health risk of voting in-person during the COVID-19 pandemic. First-time voters were also required to vote in-person, until a federal judge issued a preliminary injunction striking down the restriction. The court held that the state’s only compelling interest in enforcing that restriction is securing valid identification from the voter. Since absentee voting can accommodate identification verification and reduce the burden on voters, the court granted the plaintiffs a preliminary injunction so that first-time voters will be allowed to vote absentee this November, if they meet the narrow set of criteria to vote absentee.
While certainly a step in the right direction, this was the only win for voting rights from the Memphis A. Phillip Randolph Institute this summer. In the same suit, the group challenged Tennessee provisions including: criminal prohibitions on assisting voters to obtain absentee ballot requests; lack of opportunity to cure ballot rejections based on signature mismatches; and failure to make mail-in voting available to all voters.
A Perfect Storm: Texas’s Polling Place Closures and COVID-19
October 5, 2020
By Caitlin Turner-Lafving
On September 7, Judge Jason Pulliam dismissed Mi Familia Vota v. Abbott after determining that the case presented a nonjusticiable political question. The plaintiffs’ complaint argued that Texas’s election laws impose an undue burden on the right to vote in violation of the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment as applied to elections held during the COVID-19 pandemic: “Because Defendants have closed hundreds of polling places over the last eight years, voters will have to travel further to vote in person and vote in locations that service a higher number of voters, burdening the exercise of the franchise and the risk of person-to-person transmission of the virus.” Part of the relief sought was that the court order Governor Greg Abbott and Secretary of State Ruth Hughs to open additional polling places for the November election. (more…)
To the Virginia General Assembly: Free the Franchise, End Felony Disenfranchisement
October 2, 2020
By Allen Coon
“No person who has been convicted of a felony shall be qualified to vote unless his civil rights have been restored by the Governor or other appropriate authority.”
So decrees Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution of Virginia, which disenfranchises all Virginia residents convicted of any felony—including returning citizens with prior convictions—without petitioning the Governor. Since 2016, Virginians who have completed their sentence (including supervised probation and/or parole) can now request their rights be restored by contacting the Office of the Secretary of the Commonwealth.
Return to Sender: Colorado’s Response to Controversial Election Mailer
October 2, 2020
By: Anna Pesetski
COVID-19 has spurred a whole host of challenges in 2020 and the upcoming presidential election in November is no exception to these challenges. Given the concerns with voters travelling to the polls to cast their ballots in person, many states have opted for voting by mail. In response to the surge in mail-in voting, the United States Postal Service circulated a mailer to all fifty states and the District of Columbia containing information about the process of voting by mail. Top election officials in states across the nation have expressed concerns and frustrations with the mailer because its content conflicts with state election laws, likely causing voter confusion. The mailer has sparked controversy among Democrats, who have communicated growing fears that these mailers have been distributed out of political bias because of President Trump’s aversion to voting by mail. These fears have been exacerbated by the fact that Postmaster General Louis DeJoy has made large donations to the president’s campaign. (more…)
In a Challenge to West Virginia’s Ballot Order Law, Will the Fourth Circuit Continue a Post-Rucho Trend of Limiting Federal Review of State Election Laws?
September 30, 2020
By Daniel Bruce
A ballot order challenge currently pending before the Fourth Circuit may have significant implications for the development of political question doctrine following the Supreme Court’s controversial decision in Rucho v. Common Cause.
In August, the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia enjoined the West Virginia Secretary of State from enforcing the state’s nearly thirty-year-old ballot order statute and ordered it to implement a nondiscriminatory alternative for the 2020 election. Passed by Democrats in 1991, W. Va. Code § 3-6-2(c)(3) requires candidates appearing on statewide ballots to be placed in the order of the party whose candidate received the highest number of statewide votes in the previous presidential election.
Are long lines to vote in Georgia unconstitutional? We may soon find out
September 30, 2020
By Alex Lipow
In recent years, Georgia has become a posterchild for election controversies and administrative snafus. Election disputes have ranged from claims of unconstitutional racial gerrymandering to allegations of a conflict of interest in administering the 2018 gubernatorial election. With these issues in the background, a federal court is wrestling with a more fundamental question: do long voting lines in Georgia—which were the longest in the country in 2018 and 29 percent longer in black neighborhoods than in white neighborhoods—violate the U.S. Constitution?
On August 6, 2020, three Georgia voters, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, and the Democratic Party of Georgia (the “Plaintiffs”) filed suit against Georgia’s secretary of state, members of nine county boards of election from counties with some of the longest lines in the most recent election, and members of Georgia’s State Election Board (the “Defendants”). In their complaint, the Plaintiffs contend that the long voting lines, which have become longer and longer in each of the most recent elections, stem from the Defendants’ “persistent closure and consolidation of polling locations and failure to provide adequate election equipment, elections officials and volunteers with sufficient training, available technicians to address technical problems that arise, sufficient time to set up polling locations, and emergency paper ballots for backup when equipment breaks down or malfunctions.”