North Carolina: Lawyers return to court to argue voter ID case | Digital Journal

The legal battle over a new law requiring North Carolina voters to show a photo ID at the polls will head to federal court on Monday, just six weeks before early voting is set to begin in the state’s presidential primary. The photo ID requirement is perhaps the best-known provision of the Voter Information Verification Act (VIVA), a sweeping overhaul of North Carolina election law signed into law by Gov. Pat McCrory in August 2013. Beginning in 2016, it requires voters to show one of government-issued photo IDs in order to vote, or sign an affidavit stating a “reasonable impediment” prevented them from getting an ID. Attorneys representing the North Carolina chapter of the NAACP are suing to overturn ID requirement, claiming it creates an unfair burden for poor, elderly and minority voters.

Cambodia: National Election Committee Addressing ID Challenges | Khmer Times

The National Election Committee (NEC) is confronting challenges this week regarding new voter registration, paying particularly close attention to problems arising from the dissemination of new voter ID cards and allowing better access to monks who wish to obtain them. In an internal meeting yesterday, NEC spokesman Hang Puthea said that one of the problems with the voter ID cards is that obtaining one takes too much time. The NEC plans to continue discussions with the Interior Ministry in order to come up with solutions to that problem, such as allowing birth certificates to stand in for the cards. “We need solutions because people that have old ID cards will see them expire in 2018,” Mr. Puthea said. “They won’t be able to use them to register to vote. We will continue to talk with the ministry about the people who don’t have ID cards. They should use their birth certificates.”

Missouri: Voter ID bill wins initial approval in Missouri House | St. Louis Post-Dispatch

The Missouri House on Wednesday gave first-round approval to a resolution that would ask voters to amend the state constitution to require voters show photo identification before casting a ballot. If passed by voters, a bill, which also gained initial approval Wednesday, would dictate how the constitutional amendment would be enforced. The House debated the proposals for a tense two hours, during which Republicans argued that the bill was to protect elections against voter impersonation fraud. Democrats spoke against the proposal, saying that many constituents don’t possess IDs or a birth certificate needed to acquire an ID. They said that students and elderly African Americans born in the South would be especially impacted by the bill’s passage.

Missouri: Voter ID plan could be among most restrictive in the country | St. Louis Post-Dispatch

A Senate panel on Tuesday heard testimony on a proposal that would require voters to show a photo ID at the polls. The measure is similar to a proposal passed out of committee in the House. The bill and a separate resolution, if passed, would pose the question to voters this year in the form of a proposed constitutional amendment. In 2006, the state Supreme Court struck down a photo voter ID law, saying it infringed on the rights of voters. Sen. Will Kraus, R-Lee’s Summit, is sponsoring the bill and accompanying resolution in the Senate. Kraus is running for secretary of state.

Florida: Casting ballots twice is not a big problem, voting advocates say, but some want action | Sun Sentinel

A snowbird casts two votes for president — one in Florida and another in his or her home state up North. It’s possible, and election supervisors are looking into reports of it happening in Palm Beach and Broward counties in the 2014 general election. But such double voting represents a minuscule number of the ballots cast in a federal election, voting-rights advocates say, and trying to stop what appears to be an inconsequential problem could result in eligible voters being disenfranchised. The problem isn’t people voting twice. It is people not voting at all, said Pamela Goodman, president of the League of Women Voters of Florida. “We should be focusing on enfranchising more voters and making it easier for people to vote,” she said.

Missouri: Voter photo ID bill advances to Missouri House floor | St. Louis Post-Dispatch

A Missouri House committee advanced proposals Thursday that would require voters show photo identification at the ballot box — something Democratic members of the committee denounced as a return to racist Jim Crow laws. The House Select Committee on State and Local Governments advanced two measures on 7-3 party-line votes. One would put the question before voters this year in the form of a proposed constitutional amendment. If passed, a bill sponsored by Rep. Justin Alferman, R-Hermann, would dictate how the new rule would be enforced.

North Carolina: Judge refuses to halt voter ID requirement in March election | News & Observer

A federal judge refused Friday to block North Carolina’s photo identification requirement to vote in person from taking effect with the March 15 primary elections. U.S. District Court Judge Thomas Schroder’s ruling denying the preliminary injunction motion of the state NAACP and allied voters likely ensures that voter ID will be implemented for the first time on schedule. A trial on whether the ID law is legal will be held Jan. 25 and last several days. The Republican-led General Assembly passed an elections overhaul law in 2013 containing the mandate but deferred its start until the first election in 2016 to give people time to learn about the requirement and to obtain one of several forms of qualifying ID. The law has been in the courts ever since, including three federal lawsuits that have been consolidated into one case.

North Carolina: Elections board called out for confusing the public on voter ID | Facing South

“You can vote with or without a North Carolina driver’s license or other photo ID.” That was the refrain that Rev. Dr. William Barber, president of the North Carolina NAACP, returned to again and again during a press conference held this week to clarify state voter ID rules for the upcoming election. His group has accused the state elections board of distributing misleading information about the ID requirement. “We are deeply, deeply concerned with the message that’s going out from our State Board of Elections,” Barber said. “What we’ve seen happening is at best disingenuous, and at worst a cynical attempt to further suppress the vote.” The controversy goes back to 2013, when a U.S. Supreme Court decision weakening the Voting Rights Act enabled the North Carolina legislature to pass a restrictive voting law that among other things required citizens to show one of several approved photo IDs before being allowed to vote. The NAACP and other civil rights groups sued the state over the law’s constitutionality, with the federal trial on the ID requirements set to start on Jan. 25 in Winston-Salem, North Carolina.

North Carolina: Judge denies state NAACP’s request to delay Voter ID trial | Winston-Salem Journal

A federal judge ruled Friday that North Carolina’s photo ID requirement for voting will be in effect for the March 15 primary election. U.S. District Judge Thomas D. Schroeder denied a motion filed by the North Carolina NAACP for a preliminary injunction, saying that the plaintiffs had failed to prove the photo ID would place an undue burdens on blacks and Hispanics and had failed to prove they would likely prevail on the merits of their case in a trial set for Jan. 25. The changes that Republican state legislators made to the photo ID requirement last year, particularly allowing voters without an ID to sign a “reasonable impediment declaration” and then cast a provisional ballot, played a key role in Schroeder’s decision. “When the State did not have a reasonable impediment exception, NAACP Plaintiffs claimed the burden imposed on the socioeconomically disadvantaged was too severe,” he wrote in his decision. “Now that the State has sought to accommodate these voters with the reasonable impediment exception, Plaintiffs claim the exception swallows the rule and that the State need not have a photo ID requirement.”

North Carolina: NC board, NAACP deliver conflicting messages on voter ID | News & Observer

The state NAACP wants voters to know that there are ways to cast a ballot this year even without photo identification, but the State Board of Elections is worried that the group’s message is misleading. The state law requiring a photo ID, which goes into effect this year, allows voters without an ID to cast provisional ballots after they sign “reasonable impediment” forms saying why they couldn’t get one. The Rev. William Barber, state NAACP president, said in an interview that the Board of Elections’ education campaign, which stresses that voters should bring IDs, sends “clouded, unclear messages” because it buries information about the “reasonable impediment declaration.” “Our lawyers are deeply concerned that they have, at best, misdirected the voters because they are not saying what the law says,” Barber said. Barber and other NAACP representatives held a news conference this week to publicize its views. “You can vote with or without a photo ID,” he said.

North Carolina: NAACP: Postpone voter ID trial until after primaries | Winston-Salem Journal

The N.C. NAACP is asking a federal judge to postpone a trial on the state’s photo ID requirement until after the March 15 primary, according to court documents filed Tuesday. The trial is set to start Jan. 25 in U.S. District Court in Winston-Salem. The state NAACP, the U.S. Department of Justice and others sued North Carolina and Gov. Pat McCrory in 2013 after state Republican legislators passed a controversial sweeping elections law known as the Voter Information Verification Act. Part of that law required people to show a photo ID this year when they cast their ballots.

Virginia: Democrats Get Access to Docs in Voter I.D. Case | Courthouse News Service

Democrats challenging Virginia’s new voter photo I.D. law can inspect correspondence between lawmakers and lobbyists and others, a federal judge ruled. The law, signed by former Governor Bob McDonnell in 2013, requires all voters to provide photo I.D. at the polls. Lawmakers who supported the law claimed it helped prevent fraud in elections. But black and Latino Democrats, as well as voting rights activists Barbara Lee and Gonzalo Aida, claimed in court that the law is nothing more than a bald-faced attempt to keep young people and minorities from participating in elections.

Missouri: House committee passes 2 voter ID measures | Associated Press

A Missouri House committee approved a pair of measures Tuesday aimed at requiring government-issued photo identification to vote. A similar ID law was struck down in 2006, with the Missouri Supreme Court saying it violated state residents’ constitutional right to vote. So, Republicans plan to turn the question to voters. One measure approved Tuesday would ask voters to amend the Missouri Constitution to allow photo ID requirements. The other bill would establish the legal framework for implementing such requirements. The bills, which both passed the Missouri House Committee on Elections by an 8-3 vote, are on a fast track, according to Rep. Sue Entlicher, a Republican from Bolivar who chairs the panel. She said House Speaker Todd Richardson wants a floor vote on the bills next week, though they still must be approved from the House Select Committee on State and Local Governments.

North Carolina: Voter ID case will go to trial in January | Winston-Salem Journal

North Carolina’s photo ID requirement will go on trial late this month in U.S. District Court in Winston-Salem, a federal judge said in court papers filed Tuesday. U.S. District Judge Thomas Schroeder signed an order modifying the deadlines for discovery in the case so a trial on the photo ID requirement can begin Jan. 25. The N.C. NAACP, the U.S. Department of Justice and others sued North Carolina in 2013 after state Republican legislators passed a sweeping elections law known as the Voter Information Verification Act. The law eliminated same-day voter registration, reduced the days of early voting from 17 to 10 and prohibited county elections officials from counting ballots that were cast in the wrong precinct but right county. The law also included a photo ID requirement.

National: Voting Laws Are Still Up In The Air In These States | Huffington Post

With just about 10 months until Election Day, ongoing courtroom battles over voting restriction have made it so that we still don’t know exactly when, and how, Americans in a number of states will be able to vote. Many of those battles originated with the Supreme Court gutting Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act in 2013. Section 5 had barred states and jurisdictions with a history of racially motivated voting discrimination from enacting changes to their election laws without approval from the federal government or without going to federal court. In a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court eliminated the most effective part of the landmark 1965 civil rights act. States rushed to pass onerous measures, including requiring government-issued photo identification to vote, eliminating same-day registration and cutting early voting.

New Hampshire: Voter ID Law Remains Big Unknown for Presidential Primary Day | New Hampshire Public Radio

New Hampshire’s primary is just five weeks away, and state election officials are anticipating record turnout. There’s something else on their minds too—this will be the first presidential primary with the state’s new voter ID law in place. The law, which passed three and a half years ago, was part of a wave of stricter voter laws pushed by Republicans across the country. How it plays out on Primary Day is still an open question. Folks like Kerri Parker, the town clerk in Meredith, have been planning for that day for a while. Parker remembers when she and other election officials got together to learn the new state voting rules.

Wisconsin: Republican bill seeks to limit local photo ID cards | Milwaukee Journal Sentinel

A pair of Republican lawmakers are circulating a proposal that would prohibit county and town governments from issuing — or spending money on — photo identification cards. The legislation would also bar photo ID cards issued by cities or villages from being used for things like voting or obtaining public benefits, such as food stamps. Critics say the legislation is an attack on local control and is targeting a plan recently approved by city and county officials in Milwaukee to issue local identification cards to the homeless, immigrants in the country illegally and other residents unable to obtain state driver’s licenses or other government-issued ID cards. They also say the bill is an example of anti-immigrant discrimination. The measure’s sponsors, state Sen. Van Wanggaard (R-Racine) and state Rep. Joe Sanfelippo (R-New Berlin), say they’re trying to fight fraud and prevent confusion.

Wisconsin: GOP Wants To Block Local Governments From Issuing Voter IDs | TPM

Wisconsin Republicans are pushing state legislation that would block local governments from issuing voter ID cards — which are required at the ballot box under a 2011 law — even though the locals IDs currently being considered in a Milwaukee program aren’t meant to be used for voting. Republican state Sen. Van Wanggaard and state Rep. Joe Sanfelippo are floating a proposal that would bar cities and villages from issuing any photo ID card, according to the Journal Sentinel. It also would require that any ID issued by local governments to state clearly that it does not meet the state’s voter ID requirements. Nor can local government IDs be used for any public benefits program, under the proposal.

Wisconsin: Judge’s ruling a mixed bag for those challenging voter ID law | Milwaukee Journal Sentinel

A federal judge has thrown out portions of a challenge to Wisconsin’s voting laws but is allowing a key part of the lawsuit to proceed that could allow more types of identification to be used under the voter ID law. In his ruling last month, U.S. District Judge James Peterson in Madison also found the liberal One Wisconsin Institute could pursue its argument that recent restrictions on early voting violate the U.S. Constitution. The group brought its lawsuit in May, contending the voter ID law, limits on early voting and other policies were designed to make it harder for minorities, the poor and those backing Democrats to vote.

Virginia: Voter ID lawsuit is part of national push by Democrats | The Washington Post

Virginia’s strict voter-identification law will go on trial in a federal court in Richmond in February, part of a national strategy by Democrats to remove what they say are barriers to voting by African American, Latino and poor voters. Although Virginia’s Democratic governor, Terry McAuliffe, is sympathetic to the core issue in the lawsuit brought by two activists and the state Democratic Party, the state must defend its voter-ID law. A statute requiring photo ID was passed in 2013 and signed into law by McAuliffe’s Republican predecessor, Gov. Robert F. McDonnell. To defend against the lawsuit, Attorney General Mark Herring (D) appointed an independent counsel, Mark F. “Thor” Hearne II, who represented the 2004 reelection campaign of then-President George W. Bush.

Missouri: Lawmakers renew push for photo ID for voters | Associated Press

Republican Missouri legislative leaders, backed by veto-proof majorities, will try again in 2016 to require voters to show photo identification at the polls, despite numerous failed attempts over the past decade. Sen. Will Kraus, a Lee’s Summit Republican running for secretary of state, pre-filed a proposed constitutional amendment to allow for photo identification and a bill that would require voters to present government-issued photo ID. GOP House members pre-filed similar measures. A change to the state’s constitution would be necessary before implementing a photo ID law because the Missouri Supreme Court struck down a similar measure in 2006 as unconstitutional.

North Carolina: Elections officials notifying voters who have no valid IDs | Greensboro News & Record

State election leaders sent letters last week to 825 registered voters in North Carolina, warning that they “may not possess an acceptable form of photo ID” for voting next year. State law will require all North Carolina voters to show a picture ID to vote. Ted Fitzgerald, the state’s lead voter outreach specialist, said Monday the letter went to a narrow slice of voters: those who signed a form at the polls this year saying they don’t have the acceptable ID required to vote in 2016. The letter asks people to fill out a form about whether they plan to get an acceptable ID, or if they need help getting one. The ID requirement is part of legislation state Republican legislators passed in 2013. The Voter Information Verification Act also reduced the early voting period from 17 to 10 days, eliminated same-day voter registration and abandoned out-of-precinct provisional voting.

Tennessee: Judge dismisses students’ voting rights case | The Tennessean

A federal judge in Nashville has upheld Tennessee’s voter ID law prohibiting the use of student identification cards at the polls. U.S. District Judge Aleta Trauger on Monday granted the state’s request to dismiss the case and upheld the law as constitutional. The students who brought the case in March wanted to use their school identification cards to vote and said the state denying them the ability to do that was age discrimination. Her ruling comes after four years of debate over Tennessee’s law but does not necessarily end discussion because the ruling could be appealed.

Wisconsin: Federal judge dismisses voter ID challenge | Associated Press

Wisconsin’s requirement that voters show photo identification at the polls has survived another legal challenge after a federal judge Thursday dismissed portions of a wide-ranging lawsuit alleging the mandate burdens the right to vote. One Wisconsin Institute Inc., a liberal group; Citizen Action of Wisconsin Education Fund, a voting rights organization; and a half-dozen individual voters filed the lawsuit in June. They argued a number of provisions Republicans have added to state election law since they took over the Legislature in 2011, most prominently the photo ID requirement, violate the federal Voting Rights Act, the First Amendment and the equal protection clause. U.S. District Judge James Peterson issued an order saying he has granted the state’s motion to dismiss the portion of the lawsuit challenging the voter ID requirements. He said the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has already upheld the mandate in a separate case in October 2014. But he added he’s not convinced that the requirement promotes any confidence in the electoral process. He also rejected another section of the lawsuit alleging that statutory changes impermissibly favor voters who move to Wisconsin from out of state.

North Carolina: State attorneys oppose call for preliminary injunction against photo ID law | Winston-Salem Journal

Attorneys for the state filed court papers Friday opposing the request for a preliminary injunction against the state’s photo ID requirement before the March primaries. The N.C. NAACP filed a motion for a preliminary injunction last month, arguing that allowing the photo ID requirement during the March primaries would cause “irreparable harm” to minority voters. They argue that state officials haven’t done enough to educate voters about the photo ID requirement or about changes that state Republican legislators made to the requirement in June.

Editorials: The public doesn’t support restrictive voter ID laws, but many new ones will be in force in 2016 | Herman Schwartz/Reuters

Defenders of photo ID laws regularly cite public opinion polls that show widespread support for their arguments. Yet these polls reveal no such support, and they prove nothing about this new restrictive legislation because the polls’ questions cover a far broader range of IDs than the actual laws accept as proof of identity. Many of the new laws do not accept a college student ID, for example, or an out-of-state driver’s license; but the polls drawing favorable responses encompass such IDs. As always, the devil is in the details. When Republicans won full control of 21 states in 2010, they promptly adopted measures to restrict and deter voting by minorities, the poor and the young, all key components of the Democratic base. One of the most effective measures requires voters to show one of a restricted set of photo IDs issued by either a state or federal government. Government studies have shown that these laws can prevent or deter significant numbers of poor and minority voters from voting. By 2015, 13 states had adopted what the National Conference of State Legislatures considers a “strict” voter photo ID law, including seven Southern states formerly subject to federal oversight under the Voting Rights Act.

Alabama: Transportation officials probe possible civil rights violations in Alabama | USA Today

Federal transportation officials will investigate whether Alabama violated civil rights laws by cutting back on motor vehicle services in predominantly black counties. The cutbacks already are under fire by civil rights activists who say they make it harder to get a photo ID, a requirement to vote under a new state law. Transportation officials wrote Wednesday to the Alabama Law Enforcement Agency, citing concerns over the reduction in services.

National: U.S. Supreme Court to hear key voting rights case | San Jose Mercury News

With the potential for a seismic shift in the political landscape of California and other states hanging in the balance, the U.S. Supreme Court this week takes on a case that will test the framework of the “one person, one vote” principle that has defined political boundaries for generations. The high court on Tuesday will hear arguments in a case out of Texas that threatens to upend the way states draw their political districts based on census-driven overall population numbers — and which could alter political influence in states such as California, where mushrooming Latino populations in urban areas, including illegal immigrants and other noncitizens, play a key part in shaping political maps. Conservative groups have challenged the “one person, one vote” premise based on a simple argument that counting overall population, including those ineligible to vote, unfairly diminishes the power of citizens who are eligible to vote. They have urged the Supreme Court to invalidate the current system, which would force states to completely redraw local and state political districts using different factors and perhaps open the door to eventually reconfiguring congressional districts.

Alabama: Greater Birmingham Ministries, NAACP sue Alabama over voter ID law | AL.com

A federal lawsuit challenging Alabama’s law that requires voters to present identification before they can cast a ballot was filed Wednesday by Greater Birmingham Ministries and the Alabama NAACP. The lawsuit alleges Alabama violated the U.S. Constitution and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 when the state enacted a photo ID law in 2011. Alabama’s secretary of state had estimated that at least 280,000 registered voters would be immediately blocked from voting, the lawsuit states “If the Photo ID Law remains in place, hundreds of thousands more eligible and registered voters will be barred from voting in the years to come,” according to the lawsuit.

Wisconsin: Dane County Board, Madison City Council call on UW to make student ID cards voter friendly | The Cap Times

Jenna Roberg is from Minnesota, but the UW-Madison graduate student in social work has come to care a lot about her adopted community, she says. And that means she wants to vote here. As Roberg sees it, voting where she is living and attending school is part and parcel with the university’s vaunted Wisconsin Idea — taking the knowledge of the university beyond campus and into the community. That’s why Roberg, a member of the Student Vote Coalition, is among UW-Madison students who will speak Thursday in support of a Dane County Board resolution calling on UW-Madison to alter student identification cards to put them in compliance with state Voter ID laws. “It’s the right thing to do to make voting as easy and accessible as possible,” Roberg said. “The administration should do everything in its power to support students to have access to voting.”