Pay attention to submit absentee ballots this fall

The story at the top of Sunday’s front page was disheartening, especially leading up to an election deciding the future of this nation.

The Cincinnati Enquirer looked at data from the Ohio secretary of state’s office and found more than 21,000 votes — or one of every 100 absentee ballots — cast in the April primary election had been discarded for various reasons.

That contest was fraught with pandemic-induced problems from the outset. Originally set for March 17, it was paused at the last minute by the spring surge of coronavirus cases, briefly tied up in court and finally rescheduled for April 28. Then mail-in voting emerged as the safest option for those leery of entering polling places.

Election officials expect most voters will cast Nov. 3 ballots by mail as well while the pandemic continues to rage. But convincing voters that absentee voting can be conducted effectively is a challenge.

Even before the Enquirer reported on many Ohio ballots being rejected, voter participation was already threatened by concerns with slow mail delivery and President Donald Trump’s rants, without evidence, about mail-in voting fraud.

Thankfully, issues causing some ballots not to be counted in the spring are easily addressed, and work is underway to guard against a recurrence this fall.

Some April ballots were rejected for arriving too late, so voters must be reminded now to get ballots in early. Others contained avoidable errors.

Extensive voter education is imperative, and an initiative underway by Secretary of State Frank Larose with the Ohio Association of Broadcasters is a good example. The campaign of radio and TV public service announcements through early October will encourage voters to send in absentee ballot requests early and then to return completed ballots quickly.

It also would help to have more than one location per county for voters wary of mail delivery to drop completed ballots directly into boxes controlled by their county boards of election. Larose has directed county boards to offer only one box per county, but the Ohio Democratic Party sued in late August to seek multiple drop boxes per county. A decision from Franklin County Common Pleas Court affirming Larose’s authority to require multiple county drop boxes would be helpful.

There already are hopeful indications that Ohio voters are engaged well before the fall election season officially kicks off post-labor Day. In late August, a Dispatch/gannett survey of Ohio’s 88 county boards of election found they had already received 400,000 absentee ballot requests — many more than would have been expected by now in a presidential election year.

But that is only the beginning. Larose has made it as easy as possible for Ohioans to vote by mail; his office sent ballot request forms to 8 million registered voters last week. Other entities, including the League of Women Voters and Ohio Republican Party, also are putting absentee ballot requests in voters’ hands.

There is no reason, if Ohio voters pay attention to requirements for completing absentee ballots, for mail-in votes to be rejected this fall. And with the future direction of the nation at stake, there is every reason for voters to take advantage of absentee voting and get their ballots returned early.

Register to vote by the Oct. 5 deadline and then cast your ballot however you are most comfortable. Nothing is more important this fall.

During the term it completed in July, the Supreme Court decided several important cases involving religious liberty and one that expanded legal protection for gay Americans. In the term that begins next month, the justices will hear a case that purportedly pits those two interests against each other. The real question in the case is simpler: whether a religious organization that receives government money can violate civil-rights laws. The answer is no.

Catholic Social Services of Philadelphia has long participated in the city’s efforts to place children in foster homes, receiving a payment from the city for each child who is placed. But the city stopped referrals to the agency because it wouldn’t work with same-sex couples as foster parents — a policy the city said violated its Fair Practices Ordinance prohibiting discrimination in public accommodations.

The case raises some of the same issues as a decision two years ago in which the court ruled in favor of a Christian baker who didn’t want to provide a wedding cake for a same-sex couple. But while the court ruled narrowly in the wedding-cake case — finding for the baker on the grounds that state civil rights commissioners made comments reflecting hostility to his religious beliefs — this case raises the possibility of a more sweeping decision.

Catholic Social Services went to court seeking to force the city to resume referring children to the agency, only to lose in federal district court and in the U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals.

The appeals court’s ruling was based on a 1990 Supreme Court decision, Employment Division of Oregon vs. Smith, which held that the 1st Amendment’s protection of the free exercise of religion didn’t allow believers to opt out of generally applicable laws. The ruling led Congress to enact statutes prohibiting governments from passing laws that substantially burden religious freedom unless they serve a compelling interest and are narrowly tailored.

In its petition to the Supreme Court, Catholic Social Services asked that the high court reconsider the 1990 ruling, though it also suggested that (as in the wedding-cake case) government officials displayed a hostility to religion. The Trump administration has also urged the court to rule in favor of the Catholic agency.

But even if the court were to overrule the Smith decision, Catholic Social Services should lose. The 3rd Circuit explained why: Outlawing discrimination — including against gay and lesbian people — is a compelling government interest. Requiring compliance with civil-rights laws is the least restrictive means of pursuing that interest. Indeed, it is the only way to ensure that there isn’t illegal discrimination.

Catholic Social Services notes that when the Supreme Court ruled in 2015 that same-sex couples had a right to marry, Justice Anthony M. Kennedy said that “religions, and those who adhere to religious doctrines, may continue to advocate with utmost, sincere conviction that, by divine precepts, same-sex marriage should not be condoned.”

In that “live-and-let-live” spirit, Catholic Social Services says that it shouldn’t be “compelled to affirm same-sex marriages as the price of continuing a religious ministry. Just as no LGBT couples are prevented from marrying because a particular church does not perform same-sex weddings, no LGBT couples are prevented from fostering because a particular church cannot provide an endorsement.”

But the government isn’t involved in religious marriage ceremonies. By contrast, the city of Philadelphia is intimately implicated in foster-care arrangements made under a city contract. If a religiously affiliated agency seeks to enter into such a contract, it must agree not to discriminate against any group protected by anti-discrimination laws. That is how the court should rule.

Los Angeles Times