Most Read
    Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

    Federal Judge Rejects Texas Voter ID Law for the Second Time

    Federal Judge Rejects Texas Voter ID Law for the Second Time

    The judge “cited the state’s long history of discrimination” on her ruling.

    A federal judge has again rejected the 2011 Texas voter ID law, stating that the legislators meant to discriminate against minority voters.

    U.S. District Judge Nelva Gonzales Ramos made this same ruling in 2014, which forced an appeal. The Fifth Circuit issued a stay against the order. The Supreme Court stepped in and allowed Texas to use the voter ID law.

    But last July the Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans asked the judge “to re-examine the decision” since the judges found that “some of the evidence used by the judge wasn’t relevant.” The two sides reached a deal for the 2016 election, which allowed a voter to “sign a declaration swearing that he or she has had a reasonable difficulty that prevented obtaining one of the accepted forms of photo identification.”

    Ramos went back to the drawing board but came to the same conclusion. The Texas Tribune reported:

    After weighing the evidence again, she came to the same conclusion, according to Monday’s ruling. Her decision did not identify what some have called a smoking gun showing intent to discriminate, but it cited the state’s long history of discrimination; “virtually unprecedented radical departures from normal practices” in fast-tracking the 2011 bill through the Legislature; the legislation’s “unduly strict” terms; and lawmakers’ “shifting rationales” for passing a law that some said was needed to crack down on voter fraud.

    “The Court holds that the evidence found ‘infirm’ did not tip the scales,” Ramos wrote. Civil rights groups and others suing the state offered evidence that “established a discriminatory purpose was at least one of the substantial or motivating factors behind passage of SB 14,” she added.

    The law requires a voter to use “one of seven forms of identification” when they vote. The voter can use a driver’s license, concealed handgun license, military ID, passport, or a state-issued personal ID card.

    Democrats and civil rights activists claimed the “Republican legislators departed from procedural norms in passing the law, including classifying it as emergency legislation, cutting debate short and bypassing the ordinary committee process in both chambers.”

    But Republican officials, which includes Governor Greg Abbott, insists the law stops voter ID and strengthens the integrity of elections. From The New York Times:

    They said that the law was aimed at preventing voter fraud and that the departures from the normal legislative process were made to prevent Democratic lawmakers from manipulating procedural rules to thwart passage. They maintained that opponents had turned up no evidence that any legislator had intended to discriminate against blacks and Hispanics.

    Texas lawmakers have not announced how they’ll respond, but they can choose to appeal again. Fox News reported:

    Republican Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton did not immediately react to the ruling, although the state could once again appeal, which is what one of Paxton’s top deputies appeared to suggest would happen while testifying to lawmakers just as the ruling came down. Brantley Starr, a deputy first assistant attorney general, acknowledged that Texas could be dragged back under preclearance but noted there was little precedent.

    “It’s possible. It’s our belief that you’d have to have multiple instances of discriminatory purpose,” he said.


    Donations tax deductible
    to the full extent allowed by law.


    myiq2xu | April 11, 2017 at 6:24 pm

    It should be pointed out that “the state’s long history of discrimination” is mostly from when Democrats were running Texas.

    puhiawa | April 11, 2017 at 9:21 pm

    Democrat voter: I don’t need no stinkin’ ID.
    Democrat Judge: I don’t need no stinkin’ evidence.

    randian | April 12, 2017 at 3:50 am

    I understand the anger here, but the law is meaningless because most of the allowed forms of ID do not prove you are actually eligible to vote i.e. that you are a US citizen that has not lost their voting rights due to felony conviction. It’s doubly outrageous that such trivial obstacles to illegal voting were deemed “unduly strict”.

      gmac124 in reply to randian. | April 12, 2017 at 9:19 am

      I am not from Texas so I am assuming that voting is the same as my state. Here we have to register to vote and as long as we don’t move or miss a presidential election we show up on the voter rolls. When registering to vote they verify your voting rights. All the ID at the polling station is for is to make sure you are the person you are claiming to be. Still not impossible to vote illegally just harder.

        Milhouse in reply to gmac124. | April 16, 2017 at 12:43 pm

        When registering to vote they verify your voting rights.

        No they don’t. Even if they wanted to, how could they possibly do it? They have no way of knowing who is a citizen.

    It does discriminate against those who are not who they say they are…. We’ve had voter ID in Louisiana for a decade after Mary Landrieu stole the 1996 Senate election. We did it discretely and without fanfare.

    Leave a Comment

    Leave a Reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.

    Notify me of followup comments via e-mail (or subscribe without commenting.)

    Font Resize
    Contrast Mode
    Send this to a friend