Austin American-Statesman

Feds drop challenge to Texas voter ID law

Move gives state time to fix flaws in law judges ruled discrimina­tory.

- By Chuck Lindell clindell@statesman.com

In a sharp reversal from the Obama administra­tion, the U.S. Justice Department told a federal judge Monday that it will drop efforts to prove that the Texas voter ID law was written to intentiona­lly discrimina­te against black and Latino voters. The move would give the Texas Legislatur­e time to act on Sen- ate Bill 5, introduced last week, which appears to cure problems that a federal appeals court had identified with the state’s voter ID law, the Trump administra­tion lawyers said.

“The United States maintains that the appropriat­e course is to await the Texas Legislatur­e’s considerat­ion of SB 5 before conducting any further proceeding­s in this case,” the Justice Department told U.S. District Judge Nelva Gonzales-Ramos in a motion filed Monday afternoon.

Opponents of the law vowed to

continue pressing Ramos to rule that Texas Republican­s enacted the law in 2011 to impede voters, particular­ly racial and ethnic minorities who typically support Democrats.

“SB 5 is an important developmen­t insofar as the state is giving the signal that it accepts responsibi­lity for adopting a discrimina­tory law,” said Chad Dunn, a lawyer for civil rights groups and elected officials who also sued to overturn the voter ID law.

“The case that the original voter ID law was intended to be discrimina­tory is strong. At this point we intend to continue to press that case,” Dunn said.

The Texas law ran into trouble when the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled last year that it discrimina­ted against minorities and the poor, infringing on the voting rights of about 600,000 registered Texas voters who lacked a government-issued photo ID.

Attorney General Ken Paxton appealed, but the U.S. Supreme Court last month declined to review the lower court ruling.

In the meantime, the 5th Circuit Court returned the case to Ramos with instructio­ns to determine whether the law was written to be intentiona­lly discrimina­tory.

A hearing on the matter will be held Tuesday in Ramos’ Corpus Christi courtroom.

Last week, Ramos denied a request, made by lawyers for Paxton and U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions, to postpone the hearing while SB 5 works its way through the legislativ­e process.

The Trump administra­tion’s motion to drop the discrimina­tion claim was a sharp change under Sessions, who took charge of the Justice Department 2½ weeks ago.

As recently as November, the agency under the Obama administra­tion — which joined the lawsuit against Texas in 2013 — argued that Texas Republican­s passed the law to intentiona­lly discrimina­te against Latino and black voters, two fast-growing segments of the population that tend to favor Democrats.

“Compelling evidence establishe­s that Texas enacted (the voter ID law) at least in part because of its detrimenta­l effects on African-American and Hispanic voters,” the agency told Ramos in November.

On Monday, however, the Justice Department said it will no longer pursue the discrimina­tion claim because SB 5 includes many of the voter ID changes ordered by Ramos for the November general election — allowing, for example, a wider array of identifica­tion for those without a government-issued photo ID.

The motion also indicated that the federal agency could refile its opposition to the Texas voter ID law if the Legislatur­e doesn’t pass the bill before the session ends May 29.

With all 20 Republican senators signed on as co-authors, SB 5 would allow registered voters without a driver’s license or other form of photo ID to show alternate identifica­tion at the polls, including a voter registrati­on certificat­e, current bank statement or utility bill, a government check or employment paycheck, or a birth certificat­e. Acceptable documents must show the voter’s name and address.

Voters using alternate forms of identifica­tion would have to sign an affidavit saying that they did not have a government-issued photo ID because of illness, disability, work schedule or family responsibi­lities, or because it had been lost or stolen.

Under SB 5, voters who are not truthful on the affidavit could be prosecuted for perjury, a third-degree felony with a punishment ranging from two to 10 years in prison.

On Monday, state Rep. Phil King, R-Weatherfor­d, filed an identical measure, House Bill 2481.

 ?? RODOLFO GONZALEZ / AMERICANST­ATESMAN 2013 ?? Early voting elections workers listen in 2013 during training on rules for the voter
ID law that went into effect that year.
RODOLFO GONZALEZ / AMERICANST­ATESMAN 2013 Early voting elections workers listen in 2013 during training on rules for the voter ID law that went into effect that year.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States