Voting rights bills and lawsuits megathread (Updated: April 27th 2020)

[Virginiá]

I didn't notice it, but according to TPM, the Arizona GOP's attempt to change the redistricting commission failed in the state Senate by 2 votes. So that amendment won't be on the ballot this November. If they still hold the legislature in 2019+, they can and probably will try again.

[Virginiá]

Redistricting reform likely in Colorado

https://www.cpr.org/news/story/anti-gerrymandering-effort-sails-through-the-colorado-capitol-on-its-way-to-the-ballot

[KingSweden]

Redistricting reform likely in Colorado

https://www.cpr.org/news/story/anti-gerrymandering-effort-sails-through-the-colorado-capitol-on-its-way-to-the-ballot

Glad this is taking off in more states

[StateBoiler]

I can add one more from personal experience.

In order to play in a USA Rugby-sanctioned national club playoff match in 2 weeks, not only do you need a photo ID, you need a birth certificate as well.

[Person Man]

I can add one more from personal experience.

In order to play in a USA Rugby-sanctioned national club playoff match in 2 weeks, not only do you need a photo ID, you need a birth certificate as well.

Are there any constitutional guarantees to play in a USA Rugby-sanctioned national club playoff?

[Slander and/or Libel]

I can add one more from personal experience.

In order to play in a USA Rugby-sanctioned national club playoff match in 2 weeks, not only do you need a photo ID, you need a birth certificate as well.

The notion that the more fundamental a right, the harder it should be to exercise, is completely nuts.

[StateBoiler]

I can add one more from personal experience.

In order to play in a USA Rugby-sanctioned national club playoff match in 2 weeks, not only do you need a photo ID, you need a birth certificate as well.

The notion that the more fundamental a right, the harder it should be to exercise, is completely nuts.

Where are the bills from state and federal legislators putting a stop to the use of photo ID and other items of personal identification on everything else in life? Where are the lawsuits from ACLU and their ilk against the TSA or USA Rugby or Little League Baseball or the SAT Exam Board or the Democratic Party on banning the use of IDs, birth certificates, passports, etc. that the requirement in certain avenues is an unfair hindrance on segments of society? It's incredibly hypocritical.

I can add one more from personal experience.

In order to play in a USA Rugby-sanctioned national club playoff match in 2 weeks, not only do you need a photo ID, you need a birth certificate as well.

The notion that the more fundamental a right, the harder it should be to exercise, is completely nuts.

The notion that a person has to demonstrate something that just about every other single thing they do in life requires, otherwise they cannot function in society, does not make it harder to exercise.

I am still waiting for a good argument to the contrary from anyone on this thread anti-photo ID. I have read everyone's posts. Anyone is welcome to destroy all forms of their own personal ID and attempt to demonstrate they could still actually function in society without them.

[junior chįmp]

Turrible news for Mia Love:

Independent redistricting proposal appears to have qualified for November's ballot in Utah

[Virginiá]

Turrible news for Mia Love:

Independent redistricting proposal appears to have qualified for November's ballot in Utah

Apparently this commission recommends plans to the legislature, and the legislature can opt to enact its own plan. However, it must still abide by rules provided in this initiative, which includes a prohibition on favoring incumbents, political parties and such. (initiative text). I'm not sure how well this will play out. It allows people to seek relief in the court for erroneous maps, but it's always possible that the courts end up allowing it anyway.

I don't understand why they did it this way. Why not just have the commission enact the map, with the legislature only making recommendations? All I can think of is that because it's an initiated statute, it has to accommodate the legislature's role in redistricting. But then it's also worth noting that the legislature can change this law if it wants, and it is very easy to see that happening.

[junior chįmp]

Turrible news for Mia Love:

Independent redistricting proposal appears to have qualified for November's ballot in Utah

Apparently this commission recommends plans to the legislature, and the legislature can opt to enact its own plan. However, it must still abide by rules provided in this initiative, which includes a prohibition on favoring incumbents, political parties and such. (initiative text). I'm not sure how well this will play out. It allows people to seek relief in the court for erroneous maps, but it's always possible that the courts end up allowing it anyway.

I don't understand why they did it this way. Why not just have the commission enact the map, with the legislature only making recommendations? All I can think of is that because it's an initiated statute, it has to accommodate the legislature's role in redistricting. But then it's also worth noting that the legislature can change this law if it wants, and it is very easy to see that happening.

You make very good points. Hopefully, Gil vs Withford will lay out strict guidelines to prevent sneaky gerrymandering

[muon2]

Turrible news for Mia Love:

Independent redistricting proposal appears to have qualified for November's ballot in Utah

Apparently this commission recommends plans to the legislature, and the legislature can opt to enact its own plan. However, it must still abide by rules provided in this initiative, which includes a prohibition on favoring incumbents, political parties and such. (initiative text). I'm not sure how well this will play out. It allows people to seek relief in the court for erroneous maps, but it's always possible that the courts end up allowing it anyway.

I don't understand why they did it this way. Why not just have the commission enact the map, with the legislature only making recommendations? All I can think of is that because it's an initiated statute, it has to accommodate the legislature's role in redistricting. But then it's also worth noting that the legislature can change this law if it wants, and it is very easy to see that happening.

It looks like it would function much like the system in IA. The UT commission substitutes for the legislative bureau that draws the maps as a neutral party. Like IA the legislature gets up to three tries at a plan drawn by the neutral party, and if failing to accept them draws its own. This UT proposal seems tighter in how it deals with the situation when the neutral party plans are not accepted. It's worth noting that IA has never gone to the point of rejecting all offerings since their system began in 1980.

[Virginiá]

It looks like it would function much like the system in IA. The UT commission substitutes for the legislative bureau that draws the maps as a neutral party. Like IA the legislature gets up to three tries at a plan drawn by the neutral party, and if failing to accept them draws its own. This UT proposal seems tighter in how it deals with the situation when the neutral party plans are not accepted. It's worth noting that IA has never gone to the point of rejecting all offerings since their system began in 1980.

Does Iowa allow the Governor to veto maps? If so, that Iowa has had split control of the government in every redistricting year post-1981/2 could account for that.

[muon2]

It looks like it would function much like the system in IA. The UT commission substitutes for the legislative bureau that draws the maps as a neutral party. Like IA the legislature gets up to three tries at a plan drawn by the neutral party, and if failing to accept them draws its own. This UT proposal seems tighter in how it deals with the situation when the neutral party plans are not accepted. It's worth noting that IA has never gone to the point of rejecting all offerings since their system began in 1980.

Does Iowa allow the Governor to veto maps? If so, that Iowa has had split control of the government in every redistricting year post-1981/2 could account for that.

There is the possibility of a veto, but articles I've read about IA haven't suggested that. If one party wanted to force the issue and controlled the court, the IA constitution calls on the court to draw the map if no plan is enacted by Sep 15. That hasn't happened either since 1980, but did before the current process was created.

[Virginiá]

There is the possibility of a veto, but articles I've read about IA haven't suggested that. If one party wanted to force the issue and controlled the court, the IA constitution calls on the court to draw the map if no plan is enacted by Sep 15. That hasn't happened either since 1980, but did before the current process was created.

I suppose they could have tried. Not all state parties are as equally ruthless though. If the IAGOP was more like the NCGOP, I imagine they would have gotten rid of SDR almost immediately, along with trying to scrap the redistricting system in place.

[muon2]

There is the possibility of a veto, but articles I've read about IA haven't suggested that. If one party wanted to force the issue and controlled the court, the IA constitution calls on the court to draw the map if no plan is enacted by Sep 15. That hasn't happened either since 1980, but did before the current process was created.

I suppose they could have tried. Not all state parties are as equally ruthless though. If the IAGOP was more like the NCGOP, I imagine they would have gotten rid of SDR almost immediately, along with trying to scrap the redistricting system in place.

IA as a whole shares a lot of the sense of fair play known in their neighbor as "Minnesota nice". My visits to UT give me the impression that they may also have enough of that to make this system work.

[Virginiá]

AtlasForce beat me to it on AAD, but:

https://twitter.com/DKElections/status/1004242203881934848


Debbie Rodella was a Democrat chiefly responsible for no pro-voter access reform passing in prep for this cycle. She blocked a constitutional amendment for automatic voter registration and justified it using Republican talking points. That wasn't all she did though. Here is a little background:

https://www.taosnews.com/stories/rodella-unseated,48746

You must be logged in to read this quote.

With this, New Mexico is sure to see movement on voting rights legislation in 2019, even in the unlikely event they fail to capture the Governor's office.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

There is the possibility of a veto, but articles I've read about IA haven't suggested that. If one party wanted to force the issue and controlled the court, the IA constitution calls on the court to draw the map if no plan is enacted by Sep 15. That hasn't happened either since 1980, but did before the current process was created.

I suppose they could have tried. Not all state parties are as equally ruthless though. If the IAGOP was more like the NCGOP, I imagine they would have gotten rid of SDR almost immediately, along with trying to scrap the redistricting system in place.

IA as a whole shares a lot of the sense of fair play known in their neighbor as "Minnesota nice". My visits to UT give me the impression that they may also have enough of that to make this system work.

Ohio is a bit interesting in that regard because whether the emphasis on fair play and civility kicks in really depends on geography.  The Cleveland folks (especially on the Democratic side, but Republicans too) tend to be “anything goes” junkyard dogs of OH politics.  Even Voinovich (a politician who was pretty beloved by most Ohioans of all stripes, myself included) had to learn the hard way that most of OH outside of the Cleveland metro simply won’t put up with that crap and will vote against you for going Hard Negative (2016 was a fluke where Hillary - like Mittens - might as well have been tailor-made to lose OH and Democrats here have both a lower floor and lower ceiling than Republicans).  

Akron politics are really an extension of Cleveland politics.  There are a few other areas like the blood-red counties around HamCo (Warren, Butler, Clarmont and such), Youngstown (which has been desensitized to dirty pool due to all the relatively open political corruption there), etc that are also fine with folks going hard negative, but in much of the state, it tends to backfire.  Suburban Franklin County in particular seems to have limits to the types of negative campaigning it is willing to tolerate.

Some of the folks who have been badly damaged by going Hard Negative include Voinovich (the pedophile ad), Metzenbaum (claiming a veteran had never held a real job), Mandel (part of why he’s so hated is the smear campaign against Brown from 2012 Re: the false DV accusations), Jean Schmidt (calling a veteran a “coward” is simply incompatible with Ohio values and she was generally a nasty person), and Ben Cupp (lost a State Supreme Court race to William “I’m gonna post about my sex life on FB” O’Neill largely b/c Cupp ran an ad accussing O’Neill of being soft on pedophiles as a judge...that and O’Neill is a good Irish name )

This seems to be changing a bit on the Republican side, but I think there’s still a real distaste in much of OH for Hard Negative campaigning.  Folks are also starting to get pretty fed up with gerrymandering too, but both state parties want to keep it around as long as possible.

[Virginiá]

North Carolina Republicans giving voter ID another go with a legislatively-referred constitutional amendment:

https://www.wral.com/amendment-would-put-voter-id-in-nc-constitution/17611888/

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Hilarious that it would only apply to in-person and not absentee voting. They have more reason to be worried about absentee than in-person fraud. That is a completely partisan decision they made there.

[GeorgiaModerate]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[GeorgiaModerate]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[KingSweden]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Should have done this when the maps were drawn, Eric, since you *had to sign off on them.*

[Sestak]

DoJ is suing Kentucky to force them to purge their voter rolls.

[KingSweden]

DoJ is suing Kentucky to force them to purge their voter rolls.

Seems like a spurious VRA case

[Virginiá]

So it looks like PA Republicans, in addition to changing the current redistricting commission, want to elect appellate judges (including Supreme Court) by district, vs statewide as they do right now.

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/politics/state/pennsylvania-senate-gerrymandering-redistricting-reform-bill-sb22-judicial-district-20180613.html

I'm not sure what their new redistricting commission looks like right now, but the first iteration basically gave the legislature the final say in what was a sham commission. Either way, this is a pretty blatant power grab after the state Supreme Court didn't rule the way they liked.

It still has to be approved by the House, and then both chambers have to vote on this again in 2019, and then voters would have to approve it in 2020, so there are a couple big milestones where Democrats can fight this. If Republicans want to create a better judicial system, get rid of judicial elections entirely and just do it the federal way - executive appointment with Senate confirmation.

Edit:

http://www.philly.com/philly/columnists/john_baer/pennsylvania-redistricting-reform-imperiled-liberal-split-20180605.html

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That doesn't seem too bad, although I'm curious if there are any smaller details that might matter.

[GeorgiaModerate]

https://twitter.com/srl/status/1008832085468090370

ETA: The judge also ordered Kobach to take some legal classes!  That's hilarious.

You must be logged in to read this quote.