section update
Public Interest Law Section:
Finding Common Ground in an Election Year
By Katie O’Connor
Advancement Project
T
he past few years have been eventful ones for
voting rights, with an unprecedented amount of new
legislation, and resulting litigation, surrounding voting
laws and procedures.
There have been a number of recent election law trends, with
the widest and most well-known being the voter ID trend. In
2005, Georgia and Indiana became the only two states in the
nation to require government-issued photo identification to
vote. In 2011, Tennessee, Alabama, Kansas, Texas, South
Carolina, Wisconsin, Rhode Island, and Mississippi joined
their ranks. North Carolina, Montana, New Hampshire,
Minnesota and Missouri would also belong on that list but for
a veto by the governors of those states. In 2012, similar laws
were passed in Virginia and Pennsylvania, and vetoes were
overridden in Minnesota and New Hampshire. The Texas,
South Carolina, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania laws are now
the subject of numerous pending lawsuits, and all four laws
have been enjoined for the November 2012 election.
Another trend has been legislation to require documentary
proof of citizenship to register to vote. Arizona was the first
state to pass such a requirement in 2004, and the Supreme
Court granted certiorari in the case challenging that law on
October 15 of this year. Georgia passed a similar law in 2009,
and Alabama and Kansas followed suit in 2011. Regardless
of the outcome of the Arizona case in the Supreme Court,
these three laws will almost certainly result in further litigation.
Several states have also passed legislation to limit the ability
of eligible voters to cast a ballot before Election Day. In 2011,
Georgia, Florida, Tennessee, Ohio and West Virginia all cut
back on early voting, which allows voters to vote in the days
and weeks leading up to the election, often during evening
or weekend hours. The Florida and Ohio laws are now the
subject of federal litigation.
[email protected]
In 2012, Florida and Iowa, among other states, attempted
new voter registration list maintenance procedures that
became the subject of multiple lawsuits.
State legislatures and federal and state courts are awash
in voting rights issues, and the flood is likely to continue
for the foreseeable future. There are varying opinions
about what kind of impact these new laws and procedures
are likely to have on voters this election season. Many
civil rights organizations predict that the laws will have a
profound impact on a significant number of eligible voters
in the country because they impose considerable and
disproportionate burdens on voters of color, young voters
and voters with disabilities. Others claim that few, if any,
Americans will be burdened by the laws. It will take years
to have an accurate understanding of how these laws have
affected the electorate, and both sides of the debate are
likely to continue their fight.
In the meantime, we can all find common ground on one
point. We should do everything we can to make sure every
eligible voter is able to cast a ballot on Election Day. Public
interest and pro bono lawyers can play a significant role in
this. Many of our clients have limited resources, financially
and otherwise, and have limited access to the accurate
information they might need for Election Day. In addition
to the usual services that we offer our clients, we should
make sure that they are prepared to vote and assist them
in obtaining any information or identification that they will
need on Election Day. The fight between proponents and
opponents of these new voting laws will continue, but our
work can focus on helping our clients navigate the voting
system as it exists now and continues to evolve. ■
In 2011, Florida, Texas and Illinois also limited the ability of
community organizations to conduct voter registration drives,
and the Florida and Texas laws are now being examined in
court.
22
THE ATLANTA LAWYER
November 2012
The Official News Publication of the Atlanta Bar Association