Texas asks San Antonio panel to rule in its favor

Link: In its redistricting litigation, Texas filed a motion for partial summary judgment, asserting:



  • Claims alleging discrimination under the 14th and 15th Amendments fail because the evidence presented by the plaintiffs does not show discriminatory intent – as opposed to just a disparate impact.

  • The evidence presented by the plaintiffs “shows conclusively that the dispersal of population across the State makes it impossible to draw additional congressional districts consisting of a majority of Latino or African-American voters [and]  … plaintiffs attempts to draw alternative districts dilute protected voting groups in existing districts, violate the Fourteenth Amendment, and violate traditional redistricting principles.”  The state contends that, in evaluating any such claims, the panel must look at citizen voting age population rather than merely voting age population.  [Note: The state at this time has not sought summary judgment on claims that additional minority majority state house seats could be drawn.]

  • MALC and LULAC fail to support their claims about an alleged 4-8% census undercount of Hispanics with the required clear and convincing evidence 

Felon removed from Raleigh (NC) ballot

here is the Link




The short-lived candidacy of Lent C. Carr II came to a swift end today when the Wake County elections board ruled that his status as a felon makes him ineligible to run for a seat on the Raleigh City Council.


Carr’s name will be removed from the Oct. 11 ballot following a unanimous vote by a three-member elections panel, which needed less than five minutes to reach its decision.


Carr, imprisoned last week for violating the conditions of his parole for a 2000 fraud conviction, did not attend the hearing. But the former minister signaled through a representative that he will fight to keep his candidacy alive.

Nevada Judge Calls ACORN ‘Reprehensible,’ Slaps Group With Max Fine for Voter Fraud

File under “OUCH“


District Court Judge Donald Mosley was blunt and unsparing in his criticism of the discredited activist group. Citing the long history of voter registration fraud allegations that engulfed ACORN across the country, he slapped the group with a $5,000 fine for violating Nevada election law during the 2008 presidential election. 


Mosley, reading the pre-sentence report, listed a series of voter registration fraud allegations against ACORN workers. He said that if the claims have been true, then “It is making a mockery of our election process. If I had an individual in this courtroom…who was responsible for this kind of thing, I would put that person in prison for 10 years, hard time, and not think twice about it,” he said. “To me this is reprehensible. This is the kind of thing you see in some banana republic, Uruguay or someplace, not in the United States.” 

Florida SOS: “The court …. can’t be influenced by misinformed hearsay”

The Florida Secretary of State Kurt Browning in describing why he decided to go to court for review of voting changes, says.. “I have no reason to believe that the court’s review will be more or less
favorable than the U.S. Justice Department, which has already approved
95 percent of the law, determining it applies fairly to all Floridians,
regardless of race or color. The court provides procedural safeguards
that aren’t present elsewhere and is governed by the rules of evidence
and can’t be influenced by misinformed hearsay”…. “Elections are more accessible. Four more hours a day of early voting are
allowed. Meanwhile, weekend voting hours have been extended to a
maximum of 36 hours, 20 more than the previous law.”  and this…  “voter registration is more efficient. Everyone who registers to vote
through a third-party organization will have his or her registration
turned in within 48 hours. Fines remain consistent with former penalties
for failing to submit registration forms within the time dictated by
state law.”

It appears that while no one is guaranteed a favorable or unfavorable outcome, Secretary Kurt Browning rightfully expects a fairer and more legal review of the voting changes that Florida wants to implement, free of any improper political influence or interference from the Perez front office.  It seem a prudent call to decide a Federal court is better designed for this process than a highly charged administrative review by the newly installed stable of activist attorneys in the Voting Section – in particular after the Senate Democrats, Democratic Party, and Jesse Jackson started to lobby vociferously against these changes.  Many of the attorneys contributed money to the Obama campaign and even worked with interest groups who have sued officials to defeat similar laws. The highly respected Browning, a member of the NASS Elections Committee, joins thousands of election officials and legislators who are extremely skeptical that newly enacted voting laws (that Democrats don’t like) will ever be reviewed in a fair and objective manner.