Texas: Congressman files suit to stop Texas voter ID law | Associated Press

A Democratic congressman joined seven others Wednesday in filing a federal lawsuit to keep Texas from enforcing its voter ID law. U.S. Rep. Marc Veasey of Fort Worth filed the papers in Corpus Christi federal court, calling the requirement to show a state-issued photo ID card at the ballot box unconstitutional. The law “would have the effect of denying thousands of Texas voters the ability to vote in person, a large number of whom would be disenfranchised entirely since absentee voting in Texas is available to only certain specified categories of voters,” according to the lawsuit.

National: Supreme Court ruling sets stage for voter ID battle | Politico.com

The Supreme Court decision Tuesday striking down a key plank of the Voting Rights Act dramatically eases the way for states to push through stricter voting laws — and the flurry of action could reverberate into 2014 and beyond. Some states such as Texas moved within hours of the landmark ruling to implement so-called voter ID laws — requiring voters to show valid identification before they can cast ballots — that had been on hold. Others, such as swing state North Carolina, are expected to pass legislation this year that could complicate Democrats’ chances in 2014 midterm elections. Democrats hope to use the issue to galvanize minority voters by accusing the conservative-leaning Supreme Court and Republican statehouses of turning back the clock on hard-won voting rights. But the effect of the actual statutes, in terms of preventing people from voting who show up to the polls without proper ID, could be “devastating and immediate,” said Penda Hair, co-director of the voting rights group Advancement Project.

National: Court ruling clears way for election changes in South | USAToday

Mississippi’s top election official outlined plans on Tuesday to implement the state’s voter ID law, just hours after the Supreme Court struck down a Voting Rights Act provision that might have blocked the law. Until Tuesday’s court ruling, officials in Mississippi and other states with a history of discrimination were required under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act to get “pre-clearance” from the Justice Department or a federal court before making any change to their voting procedures. But that ended when the court ruled that Section 4 of the 1965 law, which consisted of the formula used to determine which states and other jurisdictions should be subject to Section 5, is outdated and therefore unconstitutional. The 5-4 decision clears the way for more than a dozen states and jurisdictions to move ahead with tougher voter ID laws and other changes that before Tuesday would have been subject to the pre-clearance requirement.

Mississippi: Supreme Court decision gives Mississippi voter ID go-ahead | The Clarion-Ledger

A Supreme Court ruling Tuesday strips power over voting and election rules from the federal government and returns it to states such as Mississippi with discriminatory pasts. The court, in a 5-4 ruling, effectively eliminated the federal advanced-approval power over voting laws from the Voting Rights Act of 1965. The Justice Department had used this “preclearance” power to shoot down the literacy tests, poll taxes, gerrymandering and more subtle measures that were used to inhibit minority voting. Secretary of State Delbert Hosemann said the ruling will allow him to “start today” on implementing a state voter ID law that had been awaiting federal approval. He said the new requirements should be in place for the June 2014 primaries.

Texas: Supreme Court ruling on Voting Rights Act could renew battle over Texas redistricting | Dallas Morning News

The Supreme Court decision striking down elements of the Voting Rights Act could lead to the Legislature implementing a 2011 redistricting plan that was deemed by federal judges to be discriminatory to Texas minority voters. Soon after Tuesday’s decision, Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott said that the state’s voter identification plan would immediately take effect, requiring voters to show a photo ID at the polls. “Redistricting maps passed by the Legislature may also take effect without approval from the federal government,” he said. A spokesman for Abbott, a Republican, confirmed he was talking about the 2011 redistricting plan, which is under appeal before the Supreme Court. That plan would give Republicans even more strength in the U.S. House and the Legislature.

Virginia: Governor: State in limbo on voting-law changes | The Washington Post

Gov. Robert F. McDonnell called Tuesday’s ruling on the Voting Rights Act of 1965 “a potentially monumental decision” with implications for Virginia, and he called on Congress to come up with a new formula to identify which states should now be covered. The commonwealth is one of nine states — mostly in the South with a history of discriminatory voting practices — subject to a key provision of the federal act. Under that section, states must obtain federal approval before changes are made to their voting laws. The court’s decision means Congress must issue new guidelines to decide which jurisdictions need pre-clearance before changing laws, and it’s unclear how the ruling would affect a Virginia measure requiring voters to present photo IDs to cast ballots. The law, which McDonnell signed in March, is scheduled to take effect for the 2014 elections and was subject to pre-clearance before Tuesday’s decision.

National: After Supreme Court ruling, states see green light for voter ID laws | CNN

With the Supreme Court’s ruling Tuesday on the Voting Rights Act, Mississippi and Texas announced they’re ready to move forward with their controversial voter identification laws. Eleven states in the past two years have approved laws that would require voters to show identification at voting booths. But Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act required some of those states with a history of voter discrimination to get “precleared” by the federal government before making any changes to voting laws. A separate part of the law known as Section 4 relies on a federal formula to determine which states would be covered under that “preclearance” regime. Requests by Texas and Mississippi for clearance in their voter ID laws were pending with the federal government when the high court struck down the constitutionality of the act’s Section 4 on Tuesday, which also appears to have nullified Section 5.

Mississippi: Voter ID law expected to be used by 2014 | The Sun Herald

Mississippi voters could have to start showing photo identification at the polls by the June 2014 federal primaries, Secretary of State Delbert Hosemann said Tuesday after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled certain state and local governments no longer need federal approval to change their own election laws or procedures. The Voting Rights Act of 1965 has required Mississippi and other areas with a history of racial discrimination, mainly in the South, to get clearance for changes as large as implementing a voter ID law to as small as relocating a precinct. Justices said the Voting Rights Act does not reflect racial progress made in the United States over the past 48 years, even after it was last renewed in 2006. They said the preclearance portion of the law can’t be enforced unless Congress comes up with a new formula to determine which state or local governments should be covered, based on what Chief Justice John Roberts called “current conditions” in the United States.

North Carolina: State Senator: Voter ID bill moving ahead with ruling | News Observer

Voter identification legislation in North Carolina will pick up steam again now that the U.S. Supreme Court has struck down part of the Voting Rights Act, a key General Assembly leader said Tuesday. A bill requiring voters to present one of several forms of state-issued photo ID starting in 2016 cleared the House two months ago, but it’s been sitting since in the Senate Rules Committee to wait for a ruling by the justices in an Alabama case, according to Sen. Tom Apodaca, R-Henderson, the committee chairman. He said a bill will now be rolled out in the Senate next week. The ruling essentially means a voter ID or other election legislation approved in this year’s session probably won’t have to receive advance approval by U.S. Justice Department attorneys or a federal court before such measures can be carried out. “I guess we’re safe in saying this decision was what we were expecting,” Apodaca said in an interview.

Texas: Texas rushes ahead with voter ID law after supreme court decision | guardian.co.uk

Officials in Texas said they would rush ahead with a controversial voter ID law that critics say will make it more difficult for ethnic minority citizens to vote, hours after the US supreme court released them from anti-discrimination constraints that have been in place for almost half a century. The Texas attorney general, Greg Abbott, declared that in the light of the supreme court’s judgment striking down a key element of the 1965 Voting Rights Act he was implementing instantly the voter ID law that had previously blocked by the Obama administration. “With today’s decision, the state’s voter ID law will take effect immediately. Photo identification will now be required when voting in elections in Texas.” The provocative speed with which Texas has raced to embrace its new freedoms underlines the high-stakes nature of the supreme court ruling. Civil rights leaders declared the judgment to be a major setback to the fight against race discrimination in the south that has been a running sore in the US since the civil war. “This is devastating,” the reverend Al Sharpton told MSNBC. Benjamin Todd Jealous, president of the NAACP, called the outcome “outrageous. The court’s majority put politics over decades of precedent and the rights of voters. We are more vulnerable to the flood of attacks we have seen in recent years.”

National: Eliminating problems at polls goal of presidential commission | The Clarion-Ledger

A presidential commission set up to address long lines and other problems at the polls will turn to voters, local officials and researchers in crafting a plan to improve election systems. The Presidential Commission on Election Administration, created by President Barack Obama early this year, will hold a public hearing Friday in Miami followed by hearings in Denver on Aug. 8, Philadelphia, Pa., on Sept. 4 and an unspecified city in Ohio on Sept. 20. The commission held its first public meeting Friday in Washington. “Our goal… is to keep attention very active on this issue,” said Robert Bauer, co-chairman of the commission and general counsel to Obama’s 2012 campaign. “Please help us ferret out the information that we need.” The hearings come as public attention turns to major voting issues.

Pennsylvania: Battle looms at voter ID trial | Associated Press

Pennsylvania’s long-sidelined voter identification law is about to go on trial. Civil libertarians who contend that the statute violates voters’ rights persuaded a state judge to bar enforcement of the photo ID requirement during the 2012 presidential election and the May primary. But those were temporary orders based on a narrower context; the trial set to begin July 15 in Commonwealth Court will explore the more complicated constitutional questions. It could be the beginning of a long process. Lawyers in the case say a panel of Commonwealth Court judges may weigh in following the trial, before what both sides expect will be an appeal by the loser to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.

Pennsylvania: Constitutional issues at the center of approaching trial on voter ID law | Associated Press

Pennsylvania’s long-sidelined voter identification law is about to go on trial. Civil libertarians who contend that the statute violates voters’ rights persuaded a state judge to bar enforcement of the photo ID requirement during the 2012 presidential election and the May primary. But those were temporary orders based on a narrower context; the trial set to begin July 15 in Commonwealth Court will explore the more complicated constitutional questions. It could be the beginning of a long process. Lawyers in the case say a panel of Commonwealth Court judges may weigh in following the trial, before what both sides expect will be an appeal by the loser to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.

Pennsylvania: Voter ID law likely not affected by Arizona case | Associated Press

A ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court Monday striking down an Arizona voter identification law will likely have little consequence in another legal case — that of the Pennsylvania voter identification law, legal experts said. By a 7-2 ruling, the nation’s high court on Monday ruled that in the case of Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council, Arizona had violated constitutional law and could not demand proof of citizenship as a voter registration requisite. Under the National Voter Registration Act, voters are required to swear they are citizens on the application form. The Arizona law would have demanded documentary proof at time of registration. By contrast, the Pennsylvania legislation would require all voters to show a valid photo ID at the polls. The law is scheduled for a July trial in Commonwealth Court.

New Hampshire: House, Senate cut deal on voter ID reform | Concord Monitor

Senate and House negotiators struck a last-minute deal yesterday to reform New Hampshire’s voter ID law, ensuring student ID cards will continue to be accepted as a valid form of identification at the polls. “I think it’s a good compromise,” said Rep. Gary Richardson of Hopkinton, the Democratic floor leader in the House. Negotiations between the Republican-led Senate and Democratic-led House on a bill making changes to last year’s voter ID law broke down early in the week. But the two sides continue to talk informally, and yesterday morning the committee of conference chaired by Richardson finalized a new version of the bill. It will go before the House and Senate on Wednesday for a final vote. If it passes, it will go to Gov. Maggie Hassan, a Democrat.

National: Cruz to introduce voter ID amendment to counteract Supreme Court ruling | The Hill

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) on Monday said he would offer an amendment to the Senate immigration bill to counteract a Supreme Court decision striking down state laws requiring voters to prove their citizenship. Cruz’s amendment, which he plans to attach to the bipartisan Gang of Eight bill being debated this week in the Senate, would allow states to require IDs before voters register under the federal “Motor Vehicle” voter registration law. The high court on Monday overturned an Arizona law requiring people to prove their citizenship if they wanted to register through that law. In a 7-2 vote, the court ruled in the case of Arizona v. The Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, Inc. that state law was trumped by federal law and Arizona could not require voters to provide additional information.

New Hampshire: Voter ID talks break down at State House, no compromise expected on changes to 2012 law | Concord Monitor

he Democratic effort to roll back New Hampshire’s voter ID law ran aground yesterday when negotiations between the House and Senate ended almost as soon as they began. Negotiators from the Democratic-led House and Republican-led Senate could still reach some sort of compromise before Thursday’s deadline for committees of conference to finish their work. But neither side sounds confident that will happen. “I would say the chances are slim,” said Rep. Gary Richardson, a Hopkinton Democrat and the chief House negotiator. Last year, the then-GOP-dominated Legislature enacted a law requiring voters to present photo identification or sign an affidavit at the polls. The law’s second phase will kick in this fall, with a shorter list of acceptable forms of ID that doesn’t include student IDs and a requirement that election workers photograph anyone signing an affidavit to vote.

Rhode Island: House committee approves bill to ‘freeze’ current voter ID law | Providence Journal

Rhode Island voters who have no photo IDs would be able to continue to show a government-issued ID when they go to the polls, according to a bill approved by the House Judiciary Committee Tuesday night. The vote was 11-1 with Rep. Doreen Marie Costa casting the lone dissenting vote. The bill (H-5776 Sub A), which was being redrafted until just before the hearing, now heads to the House for a floor vote. Supporters describe the bill as a compromise between those calling for stricter ID requirements for voters and others who have sought to repeal the current Voter ID law, enacted in 2011, with its requirement that voters show photo IDs starting in 2014.

National: Voting Rights Groups Get High Court Win As Bigger Case Looms | NPR

Advocates of tougher voter registration standards have racked up wins in recent years — voter ID laws have taken hold across the nation, for example. But those who believe that government should make voting as easy as possible just gained a significant victory with the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision slapping down an Arizona law that required potential voters to prove their citizenship. In its 7-2 decision, the court ruled that the 1993 National Voter Registration Act, the so-called motor voter law, trumped an Arizona law passed in 2004. The state law demanded that voters produce documentation of their citizenship at the time they registered to vote. The federal law requires those registering in federal elections only to attest to their citizenship. The process is simple enough that people can register by postcard. The high court’s decision on the Arizona law put an extra bounce in the step of officials at civil and voting-rights organizations.

Alabama: State has yet to seek preclearance of photo voter ID law approved in 2011 | al.com

Alabama’s new photo voter ID law will go into effect with the June 2014 primaries – now less than a year away — but the state has yet to submit the law for federal preclearance or to develop a free ID that is supposed to be available to voters. Alabama lawmakers in 2011 approved a law to require Alabamians – beginning with the party primaries in June of 2014 — to show photo identification in order to vote. The state has yet to submit the new law for preclearance with the U.S. Department of Justice so it can be used in next year’s elections.

New Hampshire: House, Senate agree to meet to reconcile voter ID bills | NEWS06

The state Senate agreed Wednesday to negotiate with the House on new, but differing voter identification and voter registration requirements reflected in separate versions of bills that have been debated throughout the legislative session. The Senate agreed to House requests for committees of conference on House Bill 595, which sets out forms of identification required when one steps into the polling place to cast a ballot. A conference committee was also agreed to negotiate House Bill 664, a bill establishing a nonprofit state vaccine association, to which the House’s voter registration provisions were attached last week. Differences on the voter ID bills center on whether student IDs are an acceptable form of identification at the polls. The current voter ID law allowed for the 2012 election a list of seven forms of identification acceptable at a polling place, including a student ID, and absent any of those, verification of the person’s identity by a local election official. If a voter was challenged, the voter would fill out a “challenged voter affidavit.”

Wisconsin: GOP leader vows to reinstate voter ID as Assembly passes elections bill | Wisconsin State Journal

Assembly Speaker Robin Vos vowed Wednesday that he will do everything possible to quickly reinstate the requirement that Wisconsin voters present a photo identification in time for the 2014 general election. “It’s my intention to get that bill through the Legislature … and be signed by the governor sometime this fall,” said Vos, R-Rochester. Vos made that promise just before the GOP-led Assembly approved a bipartisan elections-law bill that stripped a provision to resurrect voter ID. After that and other controversial elements were taken out of Assembly Bill 225 in committee Monday, Democrats signed on, and the measure passed the full Assembly on a voice vote Wednesday with a smattering of “no” votes.

National: Arizona voter ID case about more than driver’s licenses | Constitution Daily

It is about 2,300 miles from Phoenix, the capital of the state of Arizona, to Washington, D.C., the capital of the United States. That’s a long way. But beyond physical distance, the philosophical divide between Phoenix and D.C. may be even bigger. The Supreme Court is poised to decide the case known as Arizona v. The Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, Inc., which could have implications much broader than the matter of whether extra identification must be presented if a person without a driver’s license is trying to register to vote in Arizona. The National Voter Registration Act (NVRA), sometimes called the “Motor Voter” law, was passed in Washington, D.C., by the federal government back in 1993. It established uniform procedures for all states to follow in federal elections. Under the NVRA, someone who is registering to vote has to check a box affirming under penalty of perjury that he or she is a U.S. citizen.

Wisconsin: State committee approves revised election bill | Associated Press

Campaign donors could contribute twice as much to their favorite candidates and voters could register online under a dramatically reworked election reform bill the state Assembly’s election committee approved Monday. In a rare compromise, Republicans and minority Democrats removed language designed to reinstate voter photo identification requirements. They also dropped provisions banning in-person absentee voting on weekends and limiting local recall elections. The elections committee approved the changes 8-1, setting up a vote in the full Assembly on Wednesday. Democrats on the panel still called the bill troubling, but they thanked Republicans for changing it. The committee’s chairwoman, Rep. Kathleen Bernier, R-Chippewa Falls, still signaled the GOP plans to return to voter ID this fall. “(The compromise bill) doesn’t mean we’re not going to address other things in the future,” she told the committee.

New Hampshire: House Democrats, Senate Republicans far apart – for now – on voter ID reforms | Concord Monitor

When Democrats won control of the House last fall, rolling back or repealing the state’s new voter ID law was one of their priorities. But the Senate’s Republican majority has so far thwarted that plan, with just weeks left to reach some sort of compromise. “I always hope that people can come to compromise, and I’m hopeful that we’ll be able to compromise on this issue – although the history has not been very successful in terms of compromise on this issue,” said Rep. Gary Richardson of Hopkinton, the Democratic floor leader in the House. The Democratic-led House in March passed a bill, largely along party lines, that rolled back the voter ID law enacted last year by the GOP-controlled Legislature over a veto from then-Gov. John Lynch.

New Hampshire: House, Senate don’t agree on voting bills | NEWS06

The House Wednesday killed legislation that would change requirements for registering to vote, but agreed to negotiate with the state Senate on a conflicting versions of a separate bill addressing forms of identification required when someone steps into the polling place to cast a ballot. The House could not agree with Senate changes to the voter registration bill and agreed with Rep. Gary Richardson that “there is no ability to breach that divide” in a conference committee. It voted, 238-104, to “non-concur” with the Senate. On the voter ID bill, the House voted 286-52 to “non-concur” but also to ask the Senate for a committee of conference to negotiate differences.

Wisconsin: Opponents criticize bill aimed at reinstating voter ID | Pioneer Press

A sweeping Republican bill designed to reinstate voter photo identification requirements in Wisconsin would force poor people to humiliate themselves at the polls and scale back absentee voting opportunities, opponents warned during a public hearing on the proposal Tuesday. Rep. Jeff Stone’s bill would make a host of changes to state election law. A key provision would allow voters to opt out of showing photo IDs at the polls if they swear before the chief inspector and sign an affidavit saying they’re poor and can’t obtain identification without paying a fee; have a religious objection to being photographed; or can’t obtain the proper documents needed to acquire photo identification. Stone, R-Greendale, told the Assembly election committee during Tuesday’s hearing that the provisions are designed to overcome a court decision nullifying voter ID requirements in Wisconsin.

Wisconsin: Assembly Speaker Robin Vos wants quick action on elections bill – State elections board wants go-slow approach | Journal Sentinel

Assembly Speaker Robin Vos plans to proceed quickly with a wide-ranging election reform bill despite objections from the state elections board. “Our main message to the committee today is please slow down,” said Michael Haas, elections director for the Government Accountability Board. “The legislation addresses some significant policy areas of election and campaign finance…that would benefit from more vetting.” But Vos, a Rochester Republican, said quick passage is necessary to enact election safeguards and properly train poll workers before the next election in spring 2014. “We adjourn on June 30, so it is my intention to get a bill passed by June 30,” Vos said, referring to the end of the Assembly’s floor period. He said he is happy to discuss components of the bill in a bipartisan fashion but stressed the need for additional safeguards in election law.

Wisconsin: GOP May Push Through New Voter ID Law | WPRN

Opponents of a new bill want more time to study the legislation that would require photo ID and repeal a ban on corporate campaign contributions. The new legislation, introduced as previous voter ID legislation is tied up in the courts, is 78 pages long, leaving may Democrats asking for more time to analyze it. Wisconsin’s voter ID law is currently tied up in the courts. Rep. Jeff Stone, R-Greendale, believes his revised bill would be constitutional. Those who can’t afford a photo ID would have to reveal to election officials their lack of income or sign an affidavit why they don’t have a birth certificate to get an ID: “This is very similar to Indiana’s current photo ID law that was held in the U.S. Supreme Court.”

Editorials: Voting rights are still in danger | David Gans/Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Before the end of this month, the Supreme Court is expected to decide Shelby County, Ala. v. Holder, a constitutional challenge to the preclearance provision of the Voting Rights Act, one of the act’s most important guarantees against racial discrimination in voting. Shelby County has argued that the act is unnecessary and outdated and has urged the Supreme Court to hold it unconstitutional on that basis. With the court decision looming, a number of recent commentators have suggested that, in light of recent voter turnout data, the Voting Rights Act is no longer needed. They are wrong. In The Wall Street Journal last month, examining what he called the “good news about race and voting,” Andrew Kohut of the Pew Research Center argues that in recent presidential elections very few citizens, whatever their race, have reported difficulties going to the polls to exercise their right to vote. Mr. Kohut noted that in the last several presidential elections, African-American turnout has steadily increased. Based on the “good news” from this small slice of evidence, Mr. Kohut suggests that opponents of the Voting Rights Act could argue “the legislation has accomplished its objective of ending racial discrimination in voting and is no longer needed.”