Editorials: The Supreme Court Gives States New Weapons in the Voting Wars | Rick Hasen/The Daily Beast

Supreme Court watchers have been waiting each day to see if the Supreme Court is going to strike down a key provision of the Voting Rights Act in a case called Shelby County v. Holder. The court did not issue that opinion Monday, but it did issue another important ruling in an Arizona voting case that could lead to new struggles between states and the federal government—and between Democrats and Republicans—over the rules for running our federal elections. While the opinion is a short-term victory for the federal government, it raises more questions than answers and ultimately could shift some power in elections back to the states. In 2004, Arizona voters passed a law requiring people registering to vote in the state to provide documentary proof of citizenship. At issue in today’s case, Arizona v. Inter-Tribal Council, was a very technical question: must Arizona accept a simple federal form, required by the 1993 National Voter Registration Act (commonly known as “motor voter”), for voter registration even though the form does not require registrants to include documentary proof of citizenship?

Editorials: Pyrrhic victory for federal government in Arizona voter registration case? | Marty Lederman/SCOTUSblog

The Court, by a seven-to-two vote, today held that federal law preempts — that is to say, renders invalid — an Arizona law requiring voter registration officials to reject a voter’s application for registration if it is not accompanied by evidence of U.S. citizenship above and beyond the attestation of citizenship the applicant has made on the federal “Motor Voter” form. Lyle is almost certainly correct, however, that what appears at first to be a significant victory for the federal government might in fact be something much less than that — indeed, might establish important restrictions on Congress’s authority to determine eligibility for voting in federal elections, in a way that implicates current and potential future federal legislation.

Editorials: Opinion recap: One hand giveth…. | Lyle Denniston/SCOTUSblog

In a ruling that might easily be misunderstood if not read very closely, the Supreme Court on Monday simultaneously strengthened Congress’s hand in expanding the ranks of eligible voters, and yet assured states that they retain the ultimate power to decide who gets to vote.  The apparent bottom line: states cannot now require voters to show proof that they are U.S. citizens, but the Court has given them a plan that could gain them that power. The decision in the case of Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Arizona (docket 12-71) had major potential for sorting out the dual roles of Congress and the states in deciding eligibility to vote, and that was even more vital in the midst of a new national controversy over efforts among some states to narrow eligibility.  The end result will give both sides in that controversy encouragement, but perhaps rather confusing legal guidance.

Editorials: How the Voting Rights Act Hurts Democrats and Minorities | Steven Hill/The Atlantic

Civil rights are on the nation’s docket in a major way. Sometime this month, the U.S. Supreme Court will decide an important voting-rights case, Shelby County v. Holder, in addition to another case involving racial discrimination in higher education and two potentially landmark cases on gay marriage. By the end of June, the nation’s civil-rights profile may look quite different. In Shelby County, the justices are weighing whether the 1965 Voting Rights Act should continue to apply specially to designated regions of the country with ugly histories of racial discrimination. These regions, including the entire state of Alabama as well as eight other states and more than 60 counties, currently must seek “preclearance” from the Department of Justice for any changes to their voting laws and practices (changes can still be challenged after enactment). Officials in Shelby County, Alabama, say “times have changed,” that Shelby County is no longer the cesspool of Jim Crow racism it once was, and so the high court should overturn the preclearance requirement, known in legal parlance as Section 5.

Editorials: Scalia’s ‘Voter Access’ Case | Spencer Overton/Huffington Post

We are still waiting for a decision about the fate of the Voting Rights Act, but today the U.S. Supreme Court issued an opinion in another voting rights case. In today’s case, the Court ruled in favor of those who support voter access. Arizona must accept federal voter registration forms — even those federal forms that do not comply with Arizona’s restrictive proof-of-citizenship requirements. The opinion was written by Justice Scalia, who stated in February that the renewal of the Voting Rights Act was motivated by “racial entitlement.” Before assuming that Justice Scalia is a recent convert to voting rights protections, recognize that language in today’s opinion could eventually undermine voting rights. The details of the opinion could empower state and local partisans who manipulate voting rules. The opinion’s reasoning could also hamper federal efforts to protect military voters and restore former offender voting rights.

Editorials: The real IRS scandal | Herman Schwartz/The Great Debate (Reuters)

We just had five congressional hearings about the Internal Revenue Service, full of sound and fury, but, we now know, signifying nothing. Despite all the hoopla and headlines about IRS personnel targeting conservative tax-exempt organizations, there is no real scandal here. IRS staffers acted not only legally but, given their impossible task, quite rationally. They forgot, however, that they not only work in a political fishbowl, they swim in a sea of politics. Faced with internally contradictory regulations laid out in vague terms, and with little guidance from higher-ups, they botched it. Republicans may now finally get the chance to pour unlimited amounts of secret money into elections. The Internal Revenue Code provides a tax exemption under section 501(c)(4) for nonprofit groups “operated exclusively for the promotion of social welfare” (emphasis added). In classic oxymoronic bureaucratic doublespeak, however, a 1959 regulation decided “exclusively” really meant “primarily.” Though the courts have ruled that a tax-exempt group’s political activity must be “insubstantial,” lawyers have argued this means it can be as much as 49 percent – and the IRS has gone along. Even that has been flagrantly violated by both Democratic and Republican 501(c)(4)s.

Voting Blogs: Supreme Court Decision Strengthens “Elections Clause” of U.S. Constitution | Ballot Access News

On June 17, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an opinion in Arizona v Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, 12-71. The most important consequence of this decision is that the Elections Clause in Article One of the U.S. Constitution has been strengthened. The “Elections Clause” only relates to Congressional elections. It says, “Section 4. The Times, Places, and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.”

New Jersey: Special election, special primary, special problems | NJ.com

Critics of Gov. Chris Christie’s decision to have a special election Oct. 16 to choose a U.S. senator contend that it will create a lot of unnecessary difficulties for voters and county election officials. By opting not to have the event 20 days later, as part of the general election for state and local offices, they say, Christie has created conditions for a perfect storm: voter turnouts even smaller than the embarrassing numbers in the high 40s that are normal in New Jersey, shortages of equipment and trained personnel, and, finally, contested results. And all that on top of the extra $12 million the decision not to combine the two elections will cost the state. The governor and his circle dismiss these complaints. He had full legal authority to schedule the election when he did, they say, and he did it lawfully and for appropriate reasons. That doesn’t diminish the potential for problems, which are substantial. One factor is what the Somerset County Democrats, in a lawsuit to overturn Christie’s decision, called “a confusing patchwork of registration and voting dates, including the highly irregular placement of an election on a Wednesday.” The lawsuit was rejected last week by the Appellate Division.

New Jersey: Panel approves bill moving general election to October, coinciding with U.S. Senate special election | NorthJersey.com

Governor Christie’s decision to fill New Jersey’s U.S. Senate seat through an October special election is “bad for democracy,” the Democrat running against him said today. She and other Democrats on a state Senate committee voted today for two bills aimed at combining special and general elections. One bill would move this year’s general election — currently scheduled for Nov. 5 — to Oct. 16 to coincide with the special election. The other would prohibit the governor from holding a special election to fill any future Senate vacancy. Instead, the governor would have to appoint someone until the seat is filled in a general election. The appointee would have to belong to the same political party as the person who previously held the seat.

Egypt: Electoral commission granted right to set poll dates | Ahram Online

The Shura Council has passed an article granting the Supreme Electoral Commission (SEC) the right to set election dates. The law change on Sunday was made in response to a High Constitutional Court decision in May that deemed four articles in the parliamentary election law unconstitutional. The president has the authority to call referendums and can set the date of elections if the House of Representative (lower house of parliament) is dissolved, the article adds.

Guinea: Guinea ‘cannot hold elections on June 30’: official | AFP

An official from Guinea’s election commission said Monday that polls set for June 30 were no longer “in the programme” following weeks of deadly protests by opposition activists objecting to the date. President Alpha Conde’s announcement in April of parliamentary elections has been followed by a series of anti-government demonstrations in which dozens have been killed or wounded in the capital Conakry. “The date of June 30 scheduled for the parliamentary elections in Guinea is no longer in the programme of the Independent National Election Commission (CENI),” said the source, on condition of anonymity. “I’m not the best person to give you this information but be aware that we cannot hold the elections on June 30, as indicated by the head of state,” the source told AFP.

Iran: Election Yields Surprising Outcome | US News and World Report

Friday’s election in Iran was surprising on multiple fronts. Perceived reformer Hassan Rouhani won a majority of the vote in the first round, clinching the presidency to succeed Mahmoud Ahmadinejad who has held that position since 2005. Iranians took to the streets in celebration during the weekend to recognize not only Rouhani’s unlikely victory with 50.7 percent of the vote, but also the process itself which, unlike 2009, did not appear to be rigged by the country’s ruling elites. Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei likely felt pressure to give way to the majority rule due to the country’s economy, crippled by international sanctions, and the series of uprisings throughout the region. Protests that began in the Arab Spring in late 2010 continue to roil in countries such as neighboring Syria and Turkey.

Malaysia: Election Commission chairperson admits failure of indelible ink | Malaysian Islander

The Election Commission admits failure of indelible ink during the 13th general election. Its chairperson, Tan Sri Abdul Aziz Mohd Yusof (pic) expressed his disappointment with reports that the ink could be washed off easily. “If people ask me now, what is the saddest thing in my life, I would answer: ‘Indelible ink’,” said Abdul Aziz during an interview with Malay daily, Sinar Harian. The ink was part of the electoral reforms made last year to improve transparency within the system. However, the plan backfired when many voters found that the indelible ink can be washed off. According to Abdul Aziz, the commission tested the indelible ink several times prior to the May 5 general election.

Nepal: Electronic Voting Machine plan may not materialise | ekantipur.com

The government’s plan to use electronic voting machines (EVM) in 119 of the 240 constituencies during the upcoming Constituent Assembly (CA) elections has been rendered moot. The Indian Election Commission has said it will not be able to deliver EVMs as per Nepal’s requirement any time soon. Currently, the India-built voting console has only 64 voting switches, while the number of political parties entering the CA election fray is likely to surpass that figure. The Election Commission (EC) has registered 139 political parties so far. Although India is planning to upgrade the EVMs to accommodate 384 candidates for its 2014 general elections, it is unlikely that the plan may materialise any time soon.

Editorials: The Kremlin’s Managed Mayoral Election | The Moscow Times

The most intriguing aspect of the early mayoral election in Moscow is its complete lack of suspense. Almost two weeks have passed since pro-Kremlin Mayor Sergei Sobyanin unexpectedly resigned. He then called for a new election in three months, effectively eliminating any possible competition in the process. The election will be held according to the standard scenario of Russia’s “managed democracy” — that is, by preventing the strongest rivals to Sobyanin from running in the race, guaranteeing low voter turnout and applying the Kremlin’s massive propaganda and administrative resources to manipulate the vote. Civil Platform party leader and billionaire Mikhail Prokhorov was expected to have been Sobyanin’s main rival. During his bid for the presidency in March 2012, Prokhorov received nearly 8 percent of the vote nationally and more than 20 percent among Muscovites.

National: Supreme Court expected to rule soon on constitutionality of Voting Rights Act | Washington Examiner

The Supreme Court is expected by the end of the month to announce its ruling on a case that could end a landmark Civil Rights-era law designed to combat discriminatory voting practices nationwide. All or parts of 16 states, mostly in the South, currently must receive approval from the Justice Department or a federal court before making changes in the way they hold elections. The provision is part of the 1965 Voting Rights Act — enacted to stop Jim Crowe-era practices such as literacy tests, poll taxes or other measures designed to keep blacks from voting. But Shelby County, Ala., is challenging the constitutionality of the advance approval, or “preclearance” requirement, saying it no longer should be forced to live under oversight from Washington because it has made significant progress in combating voter discrimination.

National: Political Optics Overlooked in ‘Tea Party’ Review – IRS Official | New York Times

Internal Revenue Service employees in Ohio, who singled out conservative groups applying for tax-exempt status for extra scrutiny, likely did not consider the political implications, an IRS official in Washington has told congressional investigators. Providing additional details about the worst crisis to hit the IRS in years, tax agency official Holly Paz told investigators she was concerned when she learned that IRS employees were singling out groups with “Tea Party” and other key words in their names. Paz is the most senior IRS official to be extensively interviewed by investigators. Ousted acting IRS Commissioner Steve Miller was among the top-level Washington officials grilled by Congress in recent weeks. Investigators conducted longer transcribed interviews with IRS employees behind closed doors.

National: IRS Supervisor in DC Scrutinized Tea Party Cases | New York Times

An Internal Revenue Service supervisor in Washington says she was personally involved in scrutinizing some of the earliest applications from tea party groups seeking tax-exempt status, including some requests that languished for more than a year without action. Holly Paz, who until recently was a top deputy in the division that handles applications for tax-exempt status, told congressional investigators she reviewed 20 to 30 applications. Her assertion contradicts initial claims by the agency that a small group of agents working in an office in Cincinnati were solely responsible for mishandling the applications. Paz, however, provided no evidence that senior IRS officials ordered agents to target conservative groups or that anyone in the Obama administration outside the IRS was involved.

Editorials: Do we still need the government to end racial discrimination? | MSNBC

With two weeks left in the term, the Supreme Court is set to deliver a series of high profile rulings on civil right cases. As early as Monday, the Court could hand down its decision in Shelby County v. Holder, a case that challenges Section 5 of the 1965 Voting Rights Act. Section 5 mandates that nine states and 56 additional counties receive preclearance by the Department of Justice before making any changes to voting laws which might discriminate against minorities. Seven years ago Congress overwhelmingly reauthorized Section 5 for another 25 years, affirming that the law still plays a critical role in ensuring fair and equal voting rights. Yet, opponents of Section 5 claim that race-based discrimination is no longer present to the extent that justifies such legal protection.

Idaho: GOP rejects rule to limit ballot access in GOP primaries | Spokesman

Republican leaders in Idaho on Saturday dumped a plan calling for party officials to vet GOP primary election candidates. The rejection came at the Republican Party Central Committee’s summer meeting in McCall, where the state’s dominant political group was setting its policy direction for the year to come. The proposal was from former Senate Majority Leader Rod Beck, as a way to pressure GOP candidates into adhering more to the wishes of their local party leaders. But dozens of other Republicans including House Speaker Scott Bedke, Gov. C.L. “Butch” Otter and Twin Falls County Prosecutor Grant Loebs objected to it, on grounds that it would put decision-making in the hands of just a few people and disenfranchise broader GOP voters.

New Jersey: Christie’s Special Election Plan Heads New Jersey Supreme Court | Bloomberg

New Jersey’s Supreme Court will weigh in on Governor Chris Christie’s decision to hold a special election Oct. 16 to replace deceased U.S. Senator Frank Lautenberg. The justices put the case on a fast track today, ordering briefs by June 17 and final responses by June 18, acting state courts administrative director Judge Glenn Grant said in a statement. The move follows a lower appeals court decision yesterday that there’s no legal obstacle to holding the vote 20 days before the general election, when Christie’s on the ballot seeking a second term.

New Jersey: Union County Freeholders decline to fund special U.S. Senate election | NJ.com

Calling Gov. Chris Christie’s decision to hold a special election to fill the U.S. Senate seat left vacant after the recent death of Frank Lautenberg just weeks before an already scheduled election fiscally irresponsible, the Union County Freeholders on Thursday night declined to allocate the roughly $850,000 to fund the special balloting day, scheduled for October. Freeholder Mohamed Jalloh said holding two elections within weeks at such a cost was an unnecessary burden on taxpayers. “To have a special general election three weeks before (the scheduled election), that doesn’t make any sense,” Jalloh said this morning. “I haven’t been given an good reason as to why we would fund this twice.”

Editorials: Ohio’s chief justice offers intriguing suggestions for improving the way we elect the state’s judges | Toledo Blade

Ohioans continue to insist on the right to elect the state’s judges. We demand accountability, even though many of us don’t bother to vote in judicial elections and complain that we know next to nothing about the candidates. The Blade has long believed that Ohio would do better to select judges on the basis of professional merit rather than popular election. But because that won’t happen soon, if ever, Ohio Supreme Court Chief Justice Maureen O’Connor suggests the next best thing: strengthening the way we elect judges. Justice O’Connor is inviting Ohioans to consider and debate eight issues related to judicial elections. Several of the proposals would require changes in state law or the Ohio Constitution. She notes that judicial elections in Ohio get 25 percent less voter participation, on average, than races at the top of the ballot. She suggests two ways to combat this decline: moving judicial races higher on all ballots, and holding state and county judicial elections in odd-numbered years (when elections for municipal judgeships already occur), so they would be less likely to compete with more attention-grabbing contests and ballot issues.

South Carolina: American Party tries to grab hold in South Carolina | Live5News

South Carolina voters may have another option on the ballot in 2014 as the American Party tries to grab hold in the state. A Democrat and Republican are backing the same party. “It’s not just another party,” says Dr. James Rex, co-founder of the American Party. “It’s a much different approach to politics, and I think it’s the approach that more and more Americans are saying they want to see. We want to be the problem-solving party,” says Dr. Oscar Lovelace, also a co-founder of the American Party. “We want to engage people in public policy.” Rex and Lovelace know public policy and politics well. Rex, a Democrat, was elected superintendent of education for the state in 2006 and Lovelace, a Republican, is a physician who sought his party’s nomination for governor in 2006 as well.

Cambodia: CNRP Still Undecided on Election Boycott | The Cambodia Daily

Discussions inside the Cambodia National Rescue Party (CNRP) continued over the weekend on whether to withdraw from next month’s national election due to a series of disruptions on opposition rallies and the failure of the government to reform the country’s electoral process, a party spokesman said Sunday. CNRP spokesman Yim Sovann said that a boycott of the national election is still “an option” and that party leaders would announce their final decision on whether to participate in the July 28 vote at a press conference on Thursday. “We cannot make a decision now…. We have to decide what our M.P.s [members of Parliament] want because they [the CPP] disrupt our meetings and destroy our sign boards, so this contributes to a very unproductive environment for elections,” Mr. Sovann said, adding that a decision by the CNRP not to participate would lead to increased international scrutiny on the ruling CPP.

Editorials: Why permanent residents should get the vote in Toronto | Metro

When activists started tossing around the idea of giving permanent residents in Toronto the right to vote in municipal elections, I came to the issue as a skeptic. Citizenship as a natural prerequisite to voting rights is one of those things that just seems intuitive. But by the time Toronto City Council got around to approving a formal request to the provincial government to extend the municipal vote to non-citizens, three things had changed my mind. The first was the work of writer and activist Desmond Cole, who selflessly championed the issue all the way up to last week’s council vote. His relentless drive and super convincing arguments in favour of the idea made him into a kind of city hall rock star, proof that all you need to affect change at city hall is an advocate who isn’t prepared to back down.

Germany: Colours of the rainbow – A guide to Germany’s federal elections | The Economist

Like much of Germany’s democratic machinery, its voting system is designed to avoid past mistakes. A combination of proportional representation and first-past-the-post majority voting fosters stable coalitions and discourages small fringe parties. When Germans go to the polls on September 22nd, they will elect the members of the Bundestag, or lower house of Parliament. Whichever coalition of parties can muster a majority of members will form the federal government. (Members of the Bundesrat, the upper chamber, are delegates of Germany’s 16 states, or Länder). Germans have two votes. One is for a candidate to represent the local electoral district (of which there are 299), chosen by simple plurality of votes. The second vote is for a party. Any party receiving 5% or more of the total is entitled to seats in the Bundestag, whether any of its candidates have won a district or not. If a party gets more seats through direct election than its share of the overall vote merits, it can keep some of these “overhang” seats. Thanks to a recent change in the electoral law, the other parties then get “compensatory” seats to restore the balance among the parties. These provisions mean the precise number of Bundestag members will not be known until after the election, but it could reach 700.

Guinea: Opposition Leader: Delayed Guinean Elections Unlikely this Month | VoA News

A key opposition leader in Guinea has said it is unlikely that the country’s long-delayed parliamentary elections will take place on June 30th as planned by the country’s Independent National Elections Commission (CENI). But, Sidya Toure of the Union of Republican Forces party said there has been significant progress on some of the key areas of disagreement during talks mediated by Ambassador Said Djinnit, the Special Representative of the Secretary-General for West Africa. Toure said it could be another month or two before the long-delayed parliamentary elections are held.

Iran: President-elect Hassan Rouhani hails win | BBC

Hassan Rouhani has hailed his election as Iran’s president as a “victory of moderation over extremism”. The reformist-backed cleric won just over 50% of the vote and so avoided the need for a run-off. Thousands of Iranians took to the streets of Tehran when the result was announced, shouting pro-reform slogans. The US expressed concern at a “lack of transparency” and “censorship” but praised the Iranian people and said it was ready to work with Tehran. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu urged continued international pressure on Iran to curb its nuclear programme. “The international community must not give in to wishful thinking or temptation and loosen the pressure on Iran for it to stop its nuclear programme,” Mr Netanyahu told his cabinet, according to a statement released by his office.

Kuwait: Court Dissolves Parliament; Elections Ahead | Associated Press

Kuwait’s constitutional court forced new parliamentary elections Sunday, dissolving the current chamber on the basis of flaws in the election law, the state news agency reported. The decision may set the stage for a new wave of political showdowns in the Gulf nation. The ruling follows objections to the voting law in December’s election, which was boycotted by opposition groups and others who claimed the new rules favored Kuwait’s ruling family and were imposed without public debate.