Words cannot express my feelings and would be libelous should I do so.
The Justice Department on Friday entered the divisive national debate over new state voting laws, rejecting South Carolina’s measure requiring photo-identification at the polls as discriminatory against minority voters.
The decision by Justice’s Civil Rights Division could heighten political tensions over the new laws, which critics say could depress turnout among minorities and others who helped elect President Obama in 2008. A dozen states this year passed laws requiring voters to present state-issued photo identification, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.
Although Democratic governors vetoed four of the measures, liberal and civil rights groups have raised alarms about the remaining laws. Opponents of the laws say they would discriminate against minorities and others, such as low-income voters, because some don’t have the necessary photo identification and lack the means to easily obtain ID cards.
Conservatives and other supporters of the tighter laws say they are needed to combat voter fraud.
Under the 1965 Voting Rights Act, several of the states that enacted voter-identification laws are required to receive federal “pre-clearance” to ensure that the changes don’t affect minority political power.
In its first decision on one of those new measures, the Justice Department said Friday that South Carolina’s law will discriminate against minority voters, though the department declined to take a position on whether the alleged discrimination was intentional. The law, passed in May and signed by Gov. Nikki Haley (R), requires voters to show a driver’s license or one of several other forms of photo identification.
Officials in South Carolina could not immediately be reached for comment Friday afternoon. The rejection leaves the state with the option of trying to get the law approved by a federal court or passing another law and submitting it to the Justice Department.
The federal action signals an escalating legal battle nationwide over the new laws as the presidential campaign intensifies. The American Civil Liberties Union and another group recently filed a federal lawsuit in Milwaukee, contending that Wisconsin’s voter-identification measure is unconstitutional. It was signed into law in May.
The Justice Department’s decision on the South Carolina law comes after Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. signaled a tough stance on the new laws in a speech at the Lyndon Baines Johnson Presidential Libary and Museum in Austin, Tex., which honors the president who shepherded the 1965 Voting Rights Act into law.
Holder expressed concern about the new laws in the Dec. 13 address, saying: “Are we willing to allow this era – our era – to be remembered as the age when our nation’s proud tradition of expanding the franchise ended?’’
At the same time, Holder vowed to not let politics affect his department’s review. “We’re doing this in a very fair, apolitical way,’’ he said in a recent interview with The Washington Post. “We don’t want anybody to think that there is a partisan component to anything we are doing.’’
Groups on the right and left have been closely monitoring the Justice Department’s approach to the new laws, along with the redistricting plans enacted in Texas and every state as a result of the 2010 census. The Texas plan is now before the Supreme Court.
Some of the voter-identification measures, most of which were enacted by Republican legislatures, also impose restrictions on early voting and make it harder for former felons to vote. One study estimated that the changes could affect more than 5 million voters overall, potentially keeping them away from the polls. But the laws have proven popular, according to some surveys. Mississippi voters last month easily approved an initiative requiring a government-issued photo ID at the polls.
In addition to South Carolina, Wisconsin and Mississippi, more stringent voter-identification laws have been passed this year in Texas, Alabama, Kansas, Rhode Island, and Tennessee. Justice civil rights officials are currently examining the Texas law, along with electoral changes made by Florida that reduce the number of days for early voting.
Source: WashPost
 |
| BENJAMIN MYERS/REUTERS - Attorney General Eric Holder holds a news conference at the DOJ in Washington D.C. December 21, 2011. REUTERS/Benjamin Myers (UNITED STATES |
The decision by Justice’s Civil Rights Division could heighten political tensions over the new laws, which critics say could depress turnout among minorities and others who helped elect President Obama in 2008. A dozen states this year passed laws requiring voters to present state-issued photo identification, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.
Conservatives and other supporters of the tighter laws say they are needed to combat voter fraud.
Under the 1965 Voting Rights Act, several of the states that enacted voter-identification laws are required to receive federal “pre-clearance” to ensure that the changes don’t affect minority political power.
In its first decision on one of those new measures, the Justice Department said Friday that South Carolina’s law will discriminate against minority voters, though the department declined to take a position on whether the alleged discrimination was intentional. The law, passed in May and signed by Gov. Nikki Haley (R), requires voters to show a driver’s license or one of several other forms of photo identification.
Officials in South Carolina could not immediately be reached for comment Friday afternoon. The rejection leaves the state with the option of trying to get the law approved by a federal court or passing another law and submitting it to the Justice Department.
The federal action signals an escalating legal battle nationwide over the new laws as the presidential campaign intensifies. The American Civil Liberties Union and another group recently filed a federal lawsuit in Milwaukee, contending that Wisconsin’s voter-identification measure is unconstitutional. It was signed into law in May.
The Justice Department’s decision on the South Carolina law comes after Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. signaled a tough stance on the new laws in a speech at the Lyndon Baines Johnson Presidential Libary and Museum in Austin, Tex., which honors the president who shepherded the 1965 Voting Rights Act into law.
Holder expressed concern about the new laws in the Dec. 13 address, saying: “Are we willing to allow this era – our era – to be remembered as the age when our nation’s proud tradition of expanding the franchise ended?’’
At the same time, Holder vowed to not let politics affect his department’s review. “We’re doing this in a very fair, apolitical way,’’ he said in a recent interview with The Washington Post. “We don’t want anybody to think that there is a partisan component to anything we are doing.’’
Groups on the right and left have been closely monitoring the Justice Department’s approach to the new laws, along with the redistricting plans enacted in Texas and every state as a result of the 2010 census. The Texas plan is now before the Supreme Court.
Some of the voter-identification measures, most of which were enacted by Republican legislatures, also impose restrictions on early voting and make it harder for former felons to vote. One study estimated that the changes could affect more than 5 million voters overall, potentially keeping them away from the polls. But the laws have proven popular, according to some surveys. Mississippi voters last month easily approved an initiative requiring a government-issued photo ID at the polls.
In addition to South Carolina, Wisconsin and Mississippi, more stringent voter-identification laws have been passed this year in Texas, Alabama, Kansas, Rhode Island, and Tennessee. Justice civil rights officials are currently examining the Texas law, along with electoral changes made by Florida that reduce the number of days for early voting.
Source: WashPost
