North Dakota Bill Makes Voter Fraud a Felony

Minot Daily News.

“The bill, drafted at the request of N.D. Secretary of State Al Jaeger, is an obvious reaction to last year’s incident involving 10 members of the North Dakota State University football team. The players pleaded guilty to faking signatures and were sentenced to community service and probation.

But the damage inflicted by last year’s fraud went much further than those convicted. Because so many signatures were invalidated, two petitions failed to make it on the November ballot.”

MO House Committee passes photo ID legislation, constitutional amendment language

The Missouri House is set to again consider legislation that would require voters to show photo identification at the polls. In an 8-4 vote today, the House Elections Committee agreed to send the proposal to the full chamber. 

…The state Supreme Court struck down a 2006 photo ID law before it went
into effect, and the GOP-controlled Legislature’s efforts to push
through a similar requirement in 2011 fizzled with a gubernatorial veto
and a court challenge. Lawmakers also proposed, but failed to pass, a
photo ID bill last year. This session, Republicans have returned to
Jefferson City with veto-proof majorities in both the House and Senate
and are pushing the effort again.

Link to story

In Virginia, strange alliances

Much has been said of Virginia Lieutenant Governor Bill Bolling’s vote with Democrats on amendments to a voter ID bill.  A review of recent headlines begs the question of what alliance is the leadership of the purportedly conservative Virginia House of Delegates creating with Senate Republicans Democrats.

First, the leadership in the House of Delegates watered down photo ID bills at the committee level, but eventually passed the Virginia Senate and now the Washington Post reports from a well sourced leak that the Virginia Speaker of the House of Delegates (a Republican) leader is considering a plan to kill the redistricting plan drafted by…. Senate Republicans.  You would assume the plan helps Republicans. To maintain a majority.  In Virginia.  Ok, apparently, this is a tough call for Republicans in the House of Delegates.  And this: Democrats have been pushing the Republican Governor to veto the redistricting plan that created a new black majority minority district.

Good luck trying to make sense of it all. 

Go Cocks: Speaking at USC Law Today @ Noon


 


My tour through the law schools of the SEC continues today with a speech at the University of South Carolina School of Law at noon, Wednesday, Feb 6.  (Stay tuned for Ole Miss.) 

I will be talking about the Voting Rights Act and the Shelby County Case in the Supreme Court.  I will also address the real story behind the South Carolina Voter ID litigation and why newspapers like the State won’t cover what really happened, and instead try to blame Alan Wilson improperly for the mess, when the misconduct of a different Attorney General is to blame.

I’ll also have a few copies of my book Injustice to sign.


“Multi-State Coalition to Defend Voting Rights Act”



A press release from New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman leads:


 


New York, California, Mississippi And North Carolina File Joint Defense Against Constitutional Challenge; Coalition Argues Law Provides Important Protections For Minority Voters And That Compliance Poses No Undue Burden Or Cost On States


 


South Carolina’s Attorney General would disagree.  Section 5 compliance posed a 3.5 million-dollar “undue cost” on that state. 


 


Merced County, California also found Section 5 compliance costly and burdensome enough to apply for a bailout last year:


 


District 1 Supervisor John Pedrozo said getting out from under Section 5 of the act will make it easier and cheaper for the county to operate… Pedrozo said he’s happy the county is making progress to move beyond the cost and extra steps involved with Section 5… County Counsel James Fincher said that over the past decade, the county has spent about $1 million in legal costs and fees related to Section 5.


 


Despite hyperbolic headlines implying that the whole of the Voting Rights Act is targeted for destruction, purportedly for no other reason than to turn back the clock on civil rights, the fact is that Section 2 will continue protecting voters in all states against discriminatory practices regardless of the outcome of Shelby, and as amended in 1982, Section 2 offers expansive opportunities for plaintiffs to establish claims. 

Schneiderman’s coalition seems to be offering a defense in search of an attack.