Politicspoliticselectionlawvotingrightsvotingrightsvotersuppressionintimidation

Fri Nov 4, 2016, 07:44 PM

Fun day on election law front-a number of interesting decisions

The Texas voter id case came down just before I left to go to the Democratic National Convention and a number of cases including the 4th Circuit case came down when I was coming back from the convention. Today may rival that week and half in terms of the interesting cases that have come down with respect to election law issues. In theory courts do not issue rulings this close to an election but this cycle appears to be different. Here are some great or interesting developments.

North Carolina counties must restore voters to rolls, judge rules http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/04/politics/north-carolina-naacp-voter-registration/index.html

A federal judge in North Carolina granted a preliminary injunction to the NAACP on Friday, holding that residents whose voter registrations were canceled in recent months because of a so-called "individual challenge law" must have their registration restored.

The ruling could affect thousands of voters.

"The court concludes that the balance of the equities and public interest factors weigh decidedly in favor of protecting eligible voters who are being removed from the voter rolls," wrote Loretta Biggs of the US District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina.

Breaking: Federal Court in OH Restrains Trump, Roger Stone, Stop the Steal and *Those “Associated” with Clinton Campaign* from Voter Intimidation http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88754 and http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88761

In the meantime, I went back and looked at the order and I see that parts of it appear to apply to Trump and Stone’s actions, not just in Ohio but also anywhere in the U.S. Parts a-f do not expressly apply to Ohio, but part g applies in Ohio only. The paragraph after makes reference to Ohio law, but the rest of it does not. I think one could make a plausible argument that the judge has (likely inadvertently) issued a nationwide injunction against Trump, Stone, and others (including the Clinton campaign). Maybe someone will request clarification.

Also, the order seems to be very broad indeed, such as prohibiting any photography of voters or their vehicles. Also, it bans “admonishing.” That’s likely unconstitutionally vague, violating due process and the First Amendment.
Trump and Roger Stone are appealing this ruling. http://talkingpointsmemo.com/muckraker/trump-camp-says-it-will-appeal-restraining-order-issued-by-ohio-judge

Breaking: 9th Circuit, on 6-5 Vote, Allows AZ “Ballot Harvesting” for This Election, Leaving Possible #SCOTUS Action http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88743 and http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88306 This case deals with groups collecting and transporting multiple mailed in ballots or absentee ballots. This practice has been legal in Arizona until recently and the court reinstated this practice

Arizona passed a law limiting who is allowed to collect a completed absentee ballot from voters (so called “ballot harvesting”). Democrats and others filed suit claiming that the law was unconstitutional and a Voting Rights Act violation. A divided 9th Circuit panel voted 2-1 to allow Arizona to enforce the law pending further proceedings (affirming the district court denial of a preliminary injunction). The judges divided along the ideological lines you would expect, with the two conservatives siding with Arizona and the one liberal siding with the plaintiffs.
There is briefing due with SCOTUS Justice Kennedy tomorrow on this case http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88775

“Court Permanently Blocks Kansas’s Dual Voter Registration System” http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88741 Kobach scheme to force voters to show unnecessary documents to register was enjoined

A state court has ordered a permanent halt to Kansas’ dual voter registration system, meaning thousands of Kansans will have their votes counted for federal, state, and local elections in next week’s election and beyond.

The American Civil Liberties Union challenged the dual system, which had allowed some Kansans to vote for federal offices but not state and local offices, due solely to their method of registration. Secretary of State Kris Kobach attempted to formalize the system via an administrative rule, and the ACLU asked the court to permanently block it. Judge Larry Hendricks today agreed, ruling that Kobach “simply lacks the authority to create a two-tiered system of voter registration.”

First Report from RNC v. DNC Oral Argument: Written Order By Tomorrow http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88733 Oral arguments on the DNC v. RNC case occurred today and there should be a ruling by tomorrow This case was discussed on this thread http://discussionist.com/10151079775

This has been a busy day for voting rights cases.

1 replies, 528 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 1 replies Author Time Post
Reply Fun day on election law front-a number of interesting decisions (Original post)
Letmypeoplevote Nov 2016 OP
Argentina Nov 2016 #1

Response to Letmypeoplevote (Original post)

Fri Nov 4, 2016, 09:09 PM

1. Very interesting OP. Recommended. I think voter suppression and voter intimidation are both

forms of voter fraud because both are anti-democratic and can be used to rig an election.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Politicspoliticselectionlawvotingrightsvotingrightsvotersuppressionintimidation