Texas: Voter ID law makes it harder for women to vote, Democrats claim | theguardian.com

Some Democrats in Texas are claiming that the state’s controversial new voter identification law could make it harder for women to cast their ballots. Texans will go to the polls on November 5 to vote on nine proposed amendments to the state constitution, and some areas are also holding local government elections. It is the first statewide vote since it became mandatory in Texas to show a government-issued photo ID at polling places. Some critics of the new law believe that women who have changed their name, for example after marriage or divorce, may be discouraged from voting or run into difficulties while trying. If a prospective voter’s name does not exactly match a name on the list of registered voters, it is up to the election officer at the polling station to determine whether the name is “substantially similar”. If so, the person will be allowed to cast a ballot after signing an affidavit attesting to his or her identity. Those without approved photo ID can vote “provisionally” and then have six days after election day to present acceptable proof to a county registrar.

Editorials: More on Judge Posner’s (Now Disavowed?) Mea Culpa on Voter ID Laws | Ed Whelan/National Review

For those interested in another round of Judge Richard Posner’s selfimmolation, here’s the latest bizarre twist concerning (to quote his words from pp. 84-85 of his new book Reflections on Judging) his “plead[ing] guilty to having written the majority opinion (affirmed by the Supreme Court) upholding Indiana’s requirement that prospective voters prove their identity with a photo ID”: In a postfor the New Republic, Posner now contends that he is not “publicly recanting” his vote and that he has not “switched sides.” I agree with election-law expert (and voter ID-law critic) Rick Hasen, who finds Posner’s latest account “incredible.” For starters (as Hasen points out), in a recent HuffPost Live interview, Mike Sacks, after quoting the passage in Posner’s book, specifically asked Posner whether he thinks that he “got this one [the ruling in the Indiana voter ID case] wrong.” Posner’s response (at 9:08 of the interview) begins: “Yes. Absolutely.” He adds that he thinks the dissenting judge “was right.” (See Hasen’s post for the remainder of the response, none of which contradicts these excerpts.)

Texas: Voter ID law affects female voters | Times Record News

Newly enacted state law requiring voters to show picture identification is causing some hiccups at early-voting locations around Texas, according to a report published Sunday. Rules requiring that a voter’s name on IDs exactly match that listed in voter registration databases are especially problematic for women, The Dallas Morning News (http://dallasne.ws/19ISAWj ) reported. The general election is Nov. 5. To lessen the hassle, state officials say that if names are “substantially similar,” a voter can immediately sign an affidavit verifying his or her identity, and then vote. Another option is casting a provisional ballot, then providing supporting information later. Provisional ballots are held until elections officials can verify that they should count. State officials have promised to err on the side of the person trying to vote, rather than the other way around.

Texas: New Voter ID Law Forces Governor Candidate Wendy Davis To Sign Affidavit To Vote | KERA

Add gubernatorial candidate Wendy Davis to the growing list of women who are having problems voting because of Texas’ new photo ID law. Davis, a Democratic state senator, was voting early in Fort Worth on Monday morning when poll workers made her sign an affidavit to verify her identity. Why? Her photo ID included her maiden name, Wendy Russell Davis. But voter registration records showed: Wendy Davis. Davis used the incident as an opportunity to tell the media who had gathered that women who have had name changes may be discouraged about voting.

Nepal: Election Commission begins printing voter ID cards | Republica

The Election Commission (EC) has begun printing voter ID cards for the forthcoming Constituent Assembly (CA) election from Sunday night. The commission has been printing the voter ID cards at its central office located at Kantipath, Kathmandu. EC officials said five printers are being used to print the voter ID cards. The EC plans to complete printing of the ID cards in seven days. Asked about when the commission would distribute the voter ID cards, Chief Election Commissioner Neel Kantha Uprety said, “The voter ID cards may be distributed to voters a day before the poll day.” According to EC officials, voters will be asked to collect their ID cards from their respective polling centers. The commission on Wednesday had decided to allow A-Roll Printing Company to supply necessary papers for printing voter ID.

Editorials: I Did Not Recant My Opinion on Voter ID | Richard Posner/New Republic

A month or so ago, a new book of mine, called Reflections on Judging, was published by the Harvard University Press. I have been a federal court of appeals judge since 1981, and over this extended period I have become acutely conscious of certain deficiencies of the federal judiciary, and those deficiencies are the principal focus of the book. To my considerable surprise, one sentence—I should have thought it entirely innocuous—in the book has received unusual attention in the media and blogs, much of it critical. The sentence runs from the bottom of page 84 to the top of page 85, in a chapter entitled “The Challenge of Complexity.” The sentence reads in its entirety: “I plead guilty to having written the majority opinion (affirmed by the Supreme Court) upholding Indiana’s requirement that prospective voters prove their identity with a photo ID—a type of law now widely regarded as a means of voter suppression rather than of fraud prevention.” (The footnote provides the name and citation of the opinion: Crawford v. Marion County Election Board, 472 F.3d 949 (7th Cir. 2007), affirmed, 553 U.S. 181 (2008).)

Texas: Could name change spur Texas voter ID issue? Officials say no | Tucson Sentinel

While most of the focus on the recently implemented Texas voter ID law has been related to allegations of racial discrimination, some onlinereports have recently raised concerns that the law could disenfranchise a different demographic: people who have legally changed their names, particularly women. But election officials say the concerns are unwarranted. The media reports suggest that voters who lack an ID updated to reflect their legal name could be turned away from the polls. Women, who often change their name after marriage or divorce, are at a higher risk of disenfranchisement under the voter ID law, those reports say. But election officials deny the risk, saying protocols are in place for cases in which the name on a person’s voter ID is not identical to his or her legal name. “We encourage poll workers to look at the entirety of the ID,” said Alicia Pierce, spokeswoman for the Texas secretary of state’s office. “If the names are similar but not identical, you sign an affidavit saying you’re the same person.”

Texas: Voter ID law sparks some name-discrepancy hiccups | Associated Press

Newly enacted state law requiring voters to show picture identification is causing some hiccups at early-voting locations around Texas, according to a report published Sunday. Rules requiring that a voter’s name on IDs exactly match that listed in voter registration databases are especially problematic for women, The Dallas Morning News reported. The general election is Nov. 5. To lessen the hassle, state officials say that if names are “substantially similar,” a voter can immediately sign an affidavit verifying his or her identity, and then vote. Another option is casting a provisional ballot, then providing supporting information later. Provisional ballots are held until elections officials can verify that they should count. State officials have promised to err on the side of the person trying to vote, rather than the other way around. The voter ID law, championed by conservative activists, was approved in 2011 but didn’t take effect until recently because of legal challenges. It requires voters to produce picture identification, such as a Texas driver’s license, a concealed handgun license or a special election ID certificate issued just for voting.

National: How voter ID laws might suppress the votes of women. Republican women. | Dahlia Lithwick/Slate

Last June the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a key part of the Voting Rights Act, resulting in several states, among them Texas and North Carolina, racing to enact draconian new voter ID laws. While the first wave of attention focused on the ways such laws disproportionately impact minority voters, young voters, and the elderly, a slew of articles this past weekend point out that voter ID laws may also significantly suppress women’s votes. Indeed some have even suggested that this is the next front in the war on women, and suppressing female votes is part of the GOP’s concerted effort to ensure victories in states like Texas, where women like Wendy Davis threaten to topple the GOP with the support of female voters. It’s beyond disputing that women have ensured that Democrats, up to and including President Obama, have achieved major wins in recent elections. Female voters decided 22 of 23 Senate races in the 2012 election. But a closer look at whether voter ID laws will invariably harm liberal women and Democratic candidates at the polls suggests that something more interesting, and more complicated, may be going on here. We don’t actually have very good data to support the claim that voter ID laws will disproportionately disenfranchise progressive women. In fact some election law experts tell me the opposite may be true: These laws may hurt conservative women instead.

Texas: Voter ID law: already disorder at the polls | Dallas Morning News

We’ve known, thanks to analyses such as this based on Reuters/Ipsos polling data, that voter ID laws will suppress voting by younger folks, those without college education, the poor and Hispanics. But married women? A story out of Corpus Christi should be raising eyebrows about the negative impact the Texas voter ID requirement may have. When 117th District Court Judge Sandra Watts went for early voting, her identity was questioned because she uses her maiden name as her middle name. She uses her real middle name on her voter registration. So she had to sign an affidavit saying she was, indeed, who she said she was. It was the first time in 49 years of voting that her identity has been questioned and she has had trouble voting. “What I have used for voter registration and for identification for the last 52 years was not sufficient yesterday when I went to vote,” Judge Watts said. And this is a judge.

Tennessee: Supreme Court: Library Photo ID Can’t Be Used for Voting | Library Journal

A recent defeat in Tennessee Supreme Court ended any chance that photo identification cards issued by the Memphis Public Library can be used as voter ID—at least for now. But Memphis City Attorney Herman Morris says the yearlong legal battle produced at least one significant victory, and hinted at future challenges to the state law. Meanwhile, Memphis will continue to distribute library cards bearing photo IDs, an innovation that remains popular with patrons some 16 months after they first became available to residents. About 7,300 have been issued to date, Director of Libraries Keenon McCloy told LJ this week, and demand for them remains steady. The cards were created in in July 2012, shortly after Tennessee began requiring photo ID to vote. And while the cards were not expressly created to serve as voter ID, Memphis Mayor A.C. Wharton was convinced they could and should serve that function, as well as others. “It’s a good idea, period,” Morris said of the cards, which debuted in August 2012. “It in fact was a need.”

Texas: What Impact the Texas Voter Identification Law Has on Women Voters | TIME

In Texas, where early voting for the Nov. 5 elections started on Monday, the state’s controversial photo ID law is being enforced for the first time as citizens cast their ballots. In 2012, the Department of Justice found that the law discriminated against minorities and low-income voters in the state — now there’s  growing concern that it places an unnecessary burden on women. Name changes that may have come as a result of marriage or divorce, reports say, may cause problems at the polls. On Tuesday, a local television station ran a story about a judge who faced an issue at the voting booth. “What I have used for voter registration and for identification for the last 52 years was not sufficient yesterday when I went to vote,” 117th District Court Judge Sandra Watts told Kiii News of South Texas. She had to sign an affidavit affirming her identity in order to vote because the last name on her voter registration card, her maiden name, didn’t match the last name on her license. “This is the first time I have ever had a problem voting,” she said. State officials say the issue, however, may not cause as many problems as the reports suggest. “We want to be very careful not to cause false alarm,” Alicia Pierce, a spokesperson for the Texas Secretary of State’s office, told TIME. “We’ve worked very closely with poll workers to create the right forms and the right training to make sure this isn’t an issue at the polls.”

Editorials: Why Judge Posner Changed His Mind | Rick Hasen/The Daily Beast

Judge Richard A. Posner, the judge who delivered the landmark decision that upheld voter ID laws in Indiana in 2007, has made legal history again. In his new book, Reflections on Judging, Judge Posner includes a single sentence admitting he made a mistake: “I plead guilty to having written the majority opinion (affirmed by the Supreme Court) upholding Indiana’s requirement that prospective voters prove their identity with a photo ID—a law now widely regarded as a means of voter suppression rather than fraud prevention.” Further extrapolating on his turnabout in an interview with HuffPost Live’s Mike Sacks, Judge Posner, who sits on the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, blamed the lawyers for not giving “strong indications that requiring additional voter identification would actually disfranchise people entitled to vote.” Posner further defended himself by saying that even the more liberal Justice John Paul Stevens wrote an opinion for the Supreme Court affirming Posner’s decision. Then Justice Stevens in an interview with the Wall Street Journal defended his decision in Crawford v. Marion County Elections Board and blamed the lawyers too.

Alabama: Secretary of state issues final voter ID rules | The Montgomery Advertiser

The Alabama Secretary of State’s office Tuesday issued final rules on the implementation of the state’s voter identification law, with an eye toward making voter ID cards available by January. In 2011, the Legislature passed a law requiring voters to present a photo ID issued by a government, tribe, college or university for the 2014 elections. The law initially was subject to preclearance by the U.S. Department of Justice under the 1965 Voting Rights Act, but the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the criteria for preclearance earlier this year. The ID requirement will kick in for the state primary election next June. The new rules will not affect anyone who currently has a government-issued ID, such as a driver’s license. Those who do not will be able to apply for a voter identification at county boards of registrars or at the secretary of state’s office. Additionally, voters will be able to obtain “free nondriver identification cards” at offices where they would get driver’s licenses.

Editorials: Voting laws like North Carolina’s hurt, don’t help voters | Charlotte Observer

North Carolina officials on Monday publicly defended controversial voting changes the Republican-controlled legislature pushed this past summer, a legally mandated response to lawsuits brought by the ACLU, NAACP and the Southern Coalition for Justice. The U.S. Department of Justice is also filing suit. The state reiterated its stand that the changes were made to fight voter fraud and ensure voting integrity – and are not voter suppression, as litigants suggest. That’s hogwash, of course. And it was refreshing to finally hear recently two prominent jurists whose landmark rulings enabled voter ID laws nationwide to essentially admit that. Both Appeals Court Judge Richard A. Posner, appointed by President Ronald Reagan in 1981, and U.S. Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens, appointed by President Gerald Ford in 1975, expressed misgivings about the impact of rulings they made affirming voter ID laws. They both had seminal roles in the landmark Crawford v. Marion County Election Board case that upheld Indiana voter identification laws that, like North Carolina’s today, were viewed as the most stringent in the nation in 2007.

Pennsylvania: DePasquale: $1M on Voter ID Ads Like Betting $1M on Steelers | PoliticsPA

Auditor General Eugene DePasquale thinks the Department of State is out of line to spend $1 million this year on its Voter ID ads. The campaign instructs voters to show photo identification at the polls in November, despite a Commonwealth Court injunction on the requirement. Voters are not required to present photo ID. “Wasting $1 million to promote a law that is not even in effect is like putting $1 million on my 2-4 Steelers to win this year’s Super Bowl,” said DePasquale, a Pittsburgh native. “Instead of spending $1 million on a voter education problem that doesn’t exist, we should invest in making it easier for eligible voters to cast their ballot.”

Tennessee: Bill would circumvent state Voter ID law | The Commercial Appeal

Responding to last week’s ruling by the Tennessee Supreme Court unanimously upholding the state’s Voter ID law, U.S. Rep. Steve Cohen on Wednesday introduced legislation to circumvent its disenfranchising effects. The 2011 Voter ID law requires voters to present government-issued photographic identification in order to cast ballots in state or federal elections. In response to the law, the City of Memphis Library began issuing photo IDs, but voters Daphne Turner-Golden and Sullistine Bell were prevented from using their library cards in the August 2012 primary elections, and subsequently filed suit. In April of this year, after an appeals court ruled the library cards were valid IDs, the state legislature specifically excluded municipal library card identification as valid for voting.

Texas: Why women in Texas may be blocked from voting | MSNBC

Texas’ strict new voter ID law is being put to its first widespread test. Early voting for the November 5 elections began Monday, and there have already been signs of trouble. Under the controversial new legislation, which supporters claim prevents fraud, all voters must supply an approved form of photo identification that exactly matches the name on their voter registration cards. The U.S. Department of Justice slapped Texas with a lawsuit over this issue in August, arguing the law disenfranchises minority voters. But it could hit women particularly hard, especially those who use their maiden names or hyphenated names. Sonia Gill, an attorney at the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, warned many voters might be in for an unpleasant surprise on Election Day. “Women in particular are going to have a difficult time because they are more likely to have changed their names and, as a result, the name on their photo ID may not match up to the name listed on their voter registration.”

Editorials: Texas Voter ID Law Discriminates Against Women, Students and Minorities | Ari Berman/The Nation

Texas’s new voter ID law got off to a rocky start this week as early voting began for state constitutional amendments. The law was previously blocked as discriminatory by the federal courts under the Voting Rights Act in 2012, until the Supreme Court invalidated Section 4 of the VRA in June. The Department of Justice has filed suit against the law under Section 2 of the VRA. Now we are seeing the disastrous ramifications of the Supreme Court’s decision.Based on Texas’ own data, 600,000 to 800,000 registered voters don’t have the government-issued ID needed to cast a ballot, with Hispanics 46 to 120 percent more likely than whites to lack an ID. But a much larger segment of the electorate, particularly women, will be impacted by the requirement that a voter’s ID be “substantially similar” to their name on the voter registration rolls. According to a 2006 study by the Brennan Center for Justice, a third of all women have citizenship documents that do not match their current legal name. … The disproportionate impact of the law on women voters could be a major factor in upcoming Texas elections, especially now that Wendy Davis is running for governor in 2014.

Editorials: The Debate Over Judge Posner’s Unforced Error | New York Times

Two weeks ago, Richard Posner, one of the most respected and iconoclastic federal judges in the country, startled the legal world by publicly stating that he’d made a mistake in voting to uphold a 2005 voter-ID law out of Indiana, and that if he had properly understood the abuse of such laws, the case “would have been decided differently.” For the past ten days, the debate over Judge Posner’s comments has raged on, even drawing a response from a former Supreme Court justice. The law in question requires voters to show a photo ID at the polls as a means of preventing voter fraud. Opponents sued, saying it would disenfranchise those Indianans without photo IDs — most of whom were poor, elderly, or minorities. State officials said the law was necessary, even though no one had ever been prosecuted for voter fraud in Indiana.

Alabama: Final voter photo ID rules issued | WBRC

Alabama Secretary of State Jim Bennett Tuesday released the certified rules for Alabama’s new voter photo ID program which will go into effect for the June primaries in 2014. The release and website posting follows a 35-day public comment where his office received and considered 51 proposed comments in the preliminary rules filed in June. “We gave each of them thoughtful consideration and did make some revisions,” Bennett said. “We also met with various legislators, voter groups, senior citizen organizations, disabled citizens and nursing home administrators to gather their input.” The free voter ID process should begin as soon as January after a vendor’s contract is finalized and election officials are trained.

North Carolina: Don Yelton not so out of step with GOP on NC voter ID law | Facing South

By now you probably have heard about the reckless, racially insensitive comments Republican Party precinct chair Don Yelton of Buncombe County, N.C. made this week on The Daily Show. During an interview with correspondent Aasif Mandvi, Yelton defended North Carolina’s voter ID law while acknowledging evidence of voter fraud is flimsy. He also referred to African Americans as “lazy blacks” and even uttered the word “nigger,” leading Mandvi to remark, “You know that we can hear you, right?” …  Yelton’s comments about black and student voters, voter fraud and kicking “the Democrats in the butt” are also in line with the work of the Civitas Institute, the conservative think tank founded and largely funded by North Carolina’s Republican mega-donor and state budget director Art Pope, which helped build public support for the elections bill. One of the consequences of Civitas’ crusade against nonexistent voter fraud is that black college students have been purged from voter rolls and faced challenges to their right to vote and run for office where they live and go to school. Yelton’s remarks are also in line with what was said during state Senate hearings in April, when dozens of GOP county representatives testified in favor of the legislation. Jonathan Bandy of the N.C. Federation of Young Professional Republicans said voter ID laws weren’t racist but claimed that racism is “the notion that an African-American and an Hispanic voter who don’t have an ID are incapable of getting one” — ignoring the fact that the law creates additional barriers for voters of color given that they are more likely than white voters to lack the ID needed to vote.

North Carolina: Governor Previews Defense Of Voter ID Law | TPM

North Carolina Gov. Pat McCrory (R) delivered an extensive defense of the state’s controversial new voter identification law on Monday. After slamming the Department of Justice’s lawsuit against North Carolina as politically motivated and “without merit,” McCrory argued in a speech at The Heritage Foundation that the law actually helps to get “the politics out of early voting” and generally represses voter fraud and malpractice. “But you know, we require a voter ID to get a tattoo, to get Sudafed, to get food stamps, to get on an airplane — to get almost any government service in North Carolina right now you have to have an ID,” McCrory said. McCrory went on to note that the new law includes a provision that provides a “free ID” voter voters throughout the state.

Pennsylvania: Auditor general criticizes $1M voter ID TV ads | Associated Press

Pennsylvania’s fiscal watchdog is calling it a waste of money to spend $1 million on 30-second TV ads promoting the state’s voter ID law. Auditor General Eugene DePasquale’s criticism Tuesday echoes that of other state Democratic lawmakers, and says the ads are fostering confusion ahead of the Nov. 5 election. A judge has blocked the requirement that voters show certain forms of ID before casting a ballot.

Texas: Voter ID Law May Cause Problems for Women Using Maiden Names | KiiiTV3

The state’s new voter ID law is meant to prevent voter fraud, but it may be causing some delays at your neighborhood polling place, especially if the name on your driver’s license differs from the name on your voter registration card, even a little bit. Nueces County election officials say it is often a problem for women who use maiden names or hyphenated names. The problem came to light Monday, when a local district judge had trouble casting a ballot. “What I have used for voter registration and for identification for the last 52 years was not sufficient yesterday when I went to vote,” 117th District Court Judge Sandra Watts said. Watts has voted in every election for the last 49 years. The name on her driver’s license has remained the same for 52 years, and the address on her voter registration card or driver’s license hasn’t changed in more than two decades. So imagine her surprise when she was told by voting officials that she would have to sign a “voters affidavit” affirming she was who she said she was. “Someone looked at that and said, ‘Well, they’re not the same,'” Watts said.

Texas: New Voter ID Laws May Roll Back Women’s Voting Rights | PolicyMic

Texas, beneath the radar of higher-profile national races, will hold elections this fall to address a number of proposed constitutional amendments. Though none of the nine proposed amendments are exactly headline-grabbing (one officially eliminates a state agency that shut down more than 25 years ago, for example) the election will be the first in which the state’s infamous new voter ID laws will be in effect. The anticipated impact of these new laws on suppressing minority votes has been well documented, but the effect of new laws on women has received markedly less attention. The new Texas law requires all voters to provide a photo ID that reflects their current name. If they cannot, voters must provide any of a series of other acceptable forms of identification all of which must match exactly and match the name on their birth certificate. Supporters of these new laws insist that requiring voters to have an ID that matches their birth certificate is a reasonable requirement. As Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott has repeatedly said, “Almost every single person either has a valid photo ID … or it is very easy to get one.” What they don’t say, however, is that the people who don’t are largely married women who have taken their husband’s name. In fact, only 66% of women have an ID that reflects their current name. If any voter is using name different than what appears on their birth certificate, the voter is required to show proof of name change by providing an original or certified copy of their marriage license, divorce decree, or court ordered name change. Photocopies aren’t accepted

Voting Blogs: More Unhappiness About Judge Posner’s Second Thoughts, From Another Direction | More Soft Money Hard Law

Ed Whelan in the National Review is frustrated with Judge’s Posner’s renunciation of his Crawford opinion on voter ID. He contends that Posner’s admission of error—and his new, more critical judgment about voter photo ID requirements—is a demonstration of the flaws in the “pragmatic” adjudication that the Judge has long championed. Posner is now convinced that photo ID requirements have led to voter suppression, and Whelan counters that Posner is just expressing a personal judgment, “sloppy and ill-considered,” that follows from an open-ended mode of judging that invites subjective judgments. In support of his view, he cites from Posner’s book for the proposition that “how a judge should decide a case ‘will often depend on moral feelings, common sense, sympathies, and other ingredients of thought and feeling that can’t readily be translated into a weighing of measurable consequences.’” Whelan, citing Richard A. Posner, Reflections on Judging 6 (2013). This is not fair representation of Posner’s views, and it cannot help account for his change of heart on photo ID. If pragmatic adjudication failed Posner in this case, it is not in the way Whelan suggests.

Editorials: Kansas and Arizona continue voter suppression efforts | The Washington Post

Nothing frightens today’s Republican Party quite like the voters. Before the 2012 elections, GOP lawmakers in statehouses across the country tightened voter identification laws with one goal in common: to suppress turnout on Election Day among likely Democratic voters, especially minorities and the poor. It didn’t work. Now, harking back to the days of Jim Crow, they are at it again. In Arizona and Kansas, GOP officials are moving to adopt a two-tiered voting system, the effect of which would be to disenfranchise thousands of voters. The ploy relies on requiring birth certificates, passports and other documents that establish proof of citizenship in order to register to vote in state and local elections. Such documents are not necessary to register for federal elections. Many voters cannot easily produce such documents; fewer than half of Kansans and Arizonans possess a passport, and it’s a safe bet that many of them don’t have a birth certificate readily at hand either. That means that voter registration drives in gubernatorial, legislative and local county races, which, in the case of Democratic candidates, often target minority and poor neighborhoods, are likely to yield fewer new voters. The results are whiter and richer voters. That’s electoral gold for Republicans.

North Carolina: Democratic state official speaks out | Los Angeles Times

Roy Cooper is in a very lonely place. He’s a Democratic state attorney general surrounded by conservative Republicans who control North Carolina state government. Now those Republicans have put Cooper in an awkward spot. He has publicly condemned GOP-sponsored laws on voter identification and gay marriage, yet must defend those same laws in court. Further complicating matters, Cooper plans to run for governor in 2016. That has prompted Republican charges that he’s more interested in being governor than upholding North Carolina’s laws.

Editorials: Voting fight: Is it race or is it politics? | Charlotte Observer

North Carolina’s new restrictions on voting may favor the Republican Party, but Democrats must prove more than that to beat them in court. GOP legislators who passed the rules last summer say they are designed to streamline and modernize the state’s voting while also blocking election fraud, a problem they describe as rampant and undetected. Opponents – including U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder – say the claims of fraud are a ruse and that the laws are part of a national campaign by conservatives to suppress voting by minorities, the poor and the young. Those groups are part of an emerging Democratic coalition that swung North Carolina to President Barack Obama in 2008 and came close again four years later. Who wins in court may hinge on whether judges believe Republicans were motivated by politics or race. In other words, have black voters been discriminated against? Or were they legal targets of hard-ball GOP politics? For now, what Republicans describe as reforms, critics call “the Monster Law.”