Court upholds state voter ID law
Panel says lawmakers fixed flaws that led to discrimination concerns.
A three-judge panel of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Friday upheld the Texas voter ID law, the object of a long seesaw battle between the state’s Republican leadership on one side and Democrats and civil rights advocates on the other.
In a 2-1 decision, the appeals court reversed a lower court ruling blocking implementation of the law, which had been challenged as discriminatory in impact and intent. The 5th Circuit concluded that the Legislature last year effectively fixed the flaws in the 2011 voter ID law known as Senate Bill 14, remedying the court’s concern that the earlier law discriminated against African-American and Hispanic voters.
The court ruled that “the state acted promptly following this court’s mandate, and there is no equitable basis for subjecting Texas to ongoing federal election
scrutiny” under a provision of the federal Voting Rights Act, imposed on jurisdictions with a record of discrimination, that requires approval from the Justice Department before making any voting changes.
The decision was hailed by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, who had defended the state’s position in court.
“The court rightly recognized that when the Legislature passed Senate Bill 5 last session, it complied with every change the 5th Circuit ordered to the original voter ID law,” Paxton said. “Safeguarding the integrity of our elections is essential to preserving our democracy. The revised voter ID law removes any burden on voters who cannot obtain a photo ID.”
Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick also praised the ruling in a statement: “Today’s ruling by the 5th Circuit confirms this common sense law and safeguards the integrity of our elections. It will also enhance public trust in our democratic process going forward.”
But in his dissent, Judge James Graves Jr. wrote that the Legislature’s revisions were cosmetic.
“A hog in a silk waistcoat is still a hog,” Graves wrote. “SB 14 is an unconstitutional disenfranchisement of duly qualified electors. SB 5 is merely its adorned alter ego.”
Lupe Valdez, the former Dallas County sheriff who is in a runoff for the Democratic nomination for governor, decried the decision as a “disappointing setback.”
“We should be making it easier for eligible Texans to vote, not harder,” Valdez tweeted.
“We are undeterred by today’s decision, and we will continue to fight against laws that aim to suppress the vote,” said state Rep. Rafael Anchia, D-Dallas, chairman of the Mexican American Legislative Caucus.
The 2011 Texas voter identification law was considered among the most restrictive in the nation, requiring registered voters to present one of seven forms of government-issued photo ID — such as a driver’s license or a license to carry a handgun — before casting a ballot.
Civil rights groups, Democratic politicians and minority voters sued in 2013, arguing that the law violated the federal Voting Rights Act by targeting low-income, Latino and African-American voters, who were less likely to have the approved forms of ID.
Under SB 5, signed into law June 1, a registered voter who lacks a required photo ID can cast a ballot after showing other documents that list a name and address, including a voter registration certificate, utility bill, bank statement or paycheck.
Such voters would have to sign a “declaration of reasonable impediment” stating that they couldn’t acquire a photo ID due to a lack of transportation, lack of a birth certificate, work schedule, disability, illness, family responsibility or lost or stolen ID.
The revised law also, as the majority noted Friday, “prohibits election officials from questioning the reasonableness of the impediments sworn to by the voter.”
Unsatisfied with the legislative changes, U.S. District Judge Nelva Gonzales Ramos of Corpus Christi had issued an injunction in August permanently barring Texas from enforcing its voter ID requirements, saying the law still violated the Voting Rights Act and the Constitution because it was “enacted with discriminatory intent — knowingly placing additional burdens on a disproportionate number of Hispanic and African-American voters.”
But the 5th Circuit Court temporarily blocked Ramos’ ruling from taking effect while Paxton pursued the appeal that led to Friday’s ruling. The Justice Department had concluded that the changes the Legislature made in the law “eradicated any discriminatory effect or intent” in the original law.