“Court Rulings on Voter Restrictions”

Recently a poll asked me to define my most important political issue. Unquestionably, it’s voting rights and the damnable efforts to restrict them, to block eligible voters from voting.

Although there’s some good news in Lisette Alvarez’s Court Rulings on Voter Restrictions Create Limbo as Midterms Near – NYTimes.com., the bad news is: why have these decisions come so late in the process? Why couldn’t the courts move their asses long before states can get to claim, “Oh, gee, sorry you feel this way but we just don’t have the time to revise our voting procedures to be constitutional. So sorry.”

MIAMI — With the midterm elections only months away, efforts to carry out some of the country’s strictest photo ID requirements and shorten early voting in several politically pivotal states have been thrown into limbo by a series of court decisions concluding that the measures infringe on the right to vote. [My happy emphasis]

The most recent ruling came last Wednesday, when a federal judge ordered Ohio’s elections chief to restore early voting hours on the three days before Election Day. It is the second lower court decision in Ohio since 2012 that bolsters voter rights.

The court decisions have gone both ways, but several have provided a new round of judicial rebukes to the wave of voting restrictions, nearly all of them introduced since 2011 in states with Republican majorities. The decisions have ensured that challenges will remain a significant part of the voting landscape, perhaps for years.

And, with challenges still going through the courts, voting rules and requirements remain uncertain in several states before the midterm elections.

This entry was posted in Law, suits and order and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.