Author Archives: ELECTIONLAWCENTER.COM

NC Newspaper LTE: “Where is Eric Holder When You Need Him?”

 Gaston Gazette:

“Why hasn’t the Obama Administration and the Eric Holder Justice Department ridden in to rescue those under-privileged, disadvantaged and downtrodden individuals who will no longer be able to purchase medication (prescription or OTC cold remedies)? Do they not care about these minorities who will not only experience discrimination but the “right” to health care under these 10 laws? Surely, if showing identification to vote is discriminatory then showing identification to purchase medication is just as biased against those they pretend to defend and represent. Where is Eric Holder when you need him?”

North Carolina Democrats’ partisan opposition to voter ID stands

In North Carolina, there were a number of bills where the Governor vetoed and a bipartisan group of Democrats and Republicans (or at least a few Democrats) joined together to override the Democratic Governor veto.  However, one bill that the Democrats were able to withstand the override push was the voter ID bill.  Any attempt at improving the integrity of the voting process was uniformly attacked in a partisan manner and no Democrat dare stray from the party line.  In the end, the veto of unpopular Democratic Governor Perdue stood despite predictions of its eventual failure.

Remarkably, Democratic partisan opposition to the bill was even more solid than with the Racial Justice Act where the North Carolina legislature finally overcame the veto with revamped legislation.  Even attempts to negotiate with Democrats on the voter ID bill were rebuffed.  Of course, the Charlotte Observer is already looking to next year and wants the Republican Assembly and likely Republican Governor to “compromise” with…themselves on a watered down bill.  The year to compromise was this year but the Democrats couldn’t bring themselves to do so.

“New Hampshire voter ID law goes into effect”

The Union Leader reports that the new law “requires voters to present a
valid photo ID to vote at the polls or be photographed and sign an
affidavit saying they are who they say they are.” … The new law also requires preclearance from
the U.S. Department of Justice. A Justice spokesman did not reply to a
request for comment Friday.  New Hampshire — the only Northern
state affected — and 15 other states are subject to Section 5 of the
Voting Rights Act of 1965, which seeks to eliminate discriminatory
voting practices that bar or hinder voting by minorities.

We will see if New Hampshire gets the same treatment as the Southern states with the new photo ID law.

“Texas Voter ID fight returning to Federal Court”

The Houston Chronicle discusses the upcoming voter ID trial and the disparity on how photo ID laws which have been upheld by the Supreme Court don’t apply to all Americans as DOJ creates a second-class system for Southern states 50 years after the Voting Rights Act (VRA).


Southern states, led by Alabama, have argued that Section 5 is a violation of states’ rights.  Texas Republicans have charged that President Barack Obama’s Justice Department has manipulated its powers under the Voting Rights Act to benefit Democrats. “Instead of attacking Texas for enforcing the law, the Department of
Justice should learn from the Lone Star State and focus its resources on
protecting the integrity of the electoral system nationwide,” said
Republican U.S. Rep. Ted Poe, of Humble.

Thirty-one states require voters to show identification at the polls,
including 15 that require photo ID. The U.S. Supreme Court upheld the
right of states to require identification cards in a 2008 Indiana case,
but the Justice Department has rebuffed laws in two states covered by
the Voting Rights Act, Texas and South Carolina. New ID laws in
Mississippi and Florida are awaiting Justice Department action.