The Birmingham News reports: The Birmingham City Coun­cil's vote to select Steven Hoyt as president pro tempore may have violated the Mayor-Council Act and be invalid, city attorneys and at least one council member said Wednesday. ...

The contention comes be­cause Roderick Royal nomi­nated Hoyt for pro tem and then voted on the nomination. Royal moments earlier had been selected council presi­dent, which means he be­came acting mayor. The mayor, according to the Mayor-Council Act, cannot vote with the council. ...

J. Richmond Pearson, the council's legal adviser, said the dispute should be set­tled in court. ...

State Rep. Demetrius Newton, a former Birming­ham city attorney, said the controversy over the vote highlights the need for more clarity in the Mayor­Council Act. Newton said the question should be re­solved by legislation rather than in court. ...

Adding to the confusion, Newton contends Coun­cilwoman Carole Smither­man also should have ab­stained during the voting because of her previous role as acting mayor. -- Read the whole article --> Birmingham City Council's pro tem vote for Steven Hoyt may be invalid | Breaking News from The Birmingham News - al.com

Posted by Ed at 12:14 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Scotland on Sunday reports: THE voting age could soon be reduced from 18 to 16, in a move which could see students sitting their Highers being able to vote in the next Holyrood elections.

Energy minister Ed Miliband, who is in charge of Labour's manifesto for the UK elections, used a speech to the Scottish Labour conference yesterday to reinforce his support for the move. ...

Prime Minister Gordon Brown has suggested he would give his backing to the idea, while Conservative leader David Cameron is also said to support the move.

Westminster MPs could legislate for the Scottish Parliament as well, meaning the Holyrood elections in 2011 could be among the first to be held under a new system, if the Government decides to press ahead. -- 16-year-old Scots set to get vote by 2011 election - Scotland on Sunday

Posted by Ed at 2:57 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Montgomery Advertiser reports: Two bills currently in the state Legislature could clear up the decades-old debate about whether felons should be allowed to vote, but advocates for felons' voting rights say the bills would be worse than the existing law.

The Rev. Kenneth Glasgow, founder of The Ordinary People Society, which is based in Dothan, said the bills would roll back gains made under the current law that gives felons who haven't committed crimes of "moral turpitude" a chance to vote. Last year Glasgow, with the backing of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, sued the state Department of Corrections so he could provide voter registration information to incarcerated people who were eligible to vote. ...

The House Constitution and Election Committee advanced a bill during the second week of the session that would define moral turpitude and which crimes involve it.

The proposed bill would increase the number of crimes that involve moral turpitude from about 15 to more than 70 and revoke the voting rights of people who commit those crimes. The same committee also will decide the fate of a bill on Attorney General Troy King's agenda that would go even further than the moral turpitude bill, revoking the voting rights of anyone who commits a felony. -- Felons' voting rights back on agenda | montgomeryadvertiser.com | Montgomery Advertiser

Posted by Ed at 7:12 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Birmingham News reports: State law finally would have a definitive list of 70 felonies that disqualify from voting people convicted of the crimes, if a bill cleared by a legislative panel Wednesday becomes law.

Alabama's constitution disqualifies from voting anyone convicted of a "felony involving moral turpitude." But state law has no comprehensive list of those felonies.

A bill sponsored by state Rep. Jimmy Martin, D-Clanton, would write into the law a list of felonies that involve moral turpitude.

The constitution and elections committee of the state House of Representatives voted 8-3 for the bill, which could be debated by the full 105-member House as soon as next week. -- If it becomes law, bill would list 70 felonies that disqualify people from voting - al.com

Note: the bill may be downloaded here.

Posted by Ed at 7:33 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Washington Times reports: Supporters of the long effort to secure D.C. voting rights will return with renewed optimism Tuesday to Capitol Hill, where new legislation faces its first vote.

With a Democrat as president and more Democrats in Congress, the legislation should pass the House easily, but it still faces a close vote in the Senate.

The D.C. House Voting Rights Act will be reintroduced by Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton, Democrat and the District's non-voting House member, and Sens. Joe Lieberman, Connecticut independent, and Orrin G. Hatch, Utah Republican.

The legislation would give one House vote to the District and a fourth one to Utah, which narrowly missed getting an additional seat after the last U.S. Census. Utah, which traditionally leans to the right politically, now has one Democrat and two Republicans in the House and is the next to receive a new seat based on the last census. -- Washington Times - D.C. voting rights act gets another chance

Posted by Ed at 4:09 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reports: The state of Georgia must allow persons whose citizenship has been questioned in a new voter verification system the opportunity to cast a ballot in the Nov. 4 elections, a three-judge court ruled Monday.

The court also ordered Secretary of State Karen Handel to “make diligent and immediate efforts to notify, in a uniform manner, every person whose voter registration presently remains flagged.” Those voters must be told that they can vote by a “challenged ballot,” if necessary, and that there is a discrepancy in the voters’ registration information, the court said. -- Court: ‘Flagged’ citizens may vote

The opinion and order of the Court is here.

Posted by Ed at 2:07 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Emptywheel reports at Firedoglake.com: Democrats and Republicans have settled the suit seeking to prevent Michigan Republicans from using foreclosure lists to challenge voters. The MDP statement on the settlement says:

An agreement announced today by Obama for America, the Republican National Committee, the Democratic National Committee, the Michigan Republican Party, the Michigan Democratic Party, the Macomb County Republican Party, the Macomb County Democratic Party, and plaintiffs Duane Maletski, Sharon Lopez, and Frances M. Zick protects the voting rights of foreclosure victims. The settlement acknowledges the existence of an illegal scheme by the Republicans to use mortgage foreclosure lists to deny foreclosure victims their right to vote. This settlement has the force of law behind it and ensures that Republicans cannot disenfranchise families facing foreclosure. [my emphasis]

-- MI Republicans Admit to Illegal Foreclosure Scheme, “Surrender” to Democrats

Posted by Ed at 3:26 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

AP reports: A Montgomery judge on Friday dismissed a lawsuit by the American Civil Liberties Union to clarify which ex-felons in Alabama can register to vote, in a decision that means the issue won’t be resolved before the Nov. 4 election.

Circuit Judge Tracy McCooey said the ACLU’s clients lacked legal standing to sue because they had not taken steps necessary to do so. Two had not tried to register to vote. The third client had attempted to register, but had not exhausted possible appeals in probate court before going to the circuit court.

Because of that, “this court lacks jurisdiction to even decide the merits of the case,” McCooey wrote.

ACLU attorney Bobby Segall said Friday it’s very likely his clients will appeal to the Alabama Supreme Court, but even if the court expedited the case, there would be no way to obtain a ruling before an Oct. 24 deadline for new voters to qualify for the ballot.

If the issue can’t be resolved before the election Nov. 4, Segall wants to get a court ruling before 2010, when many major state offices will be on the ballot. -- Felon voting suit by ACLU dismissed

Posted by Ed at 8:18 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

AP reports: Voter registrars could have to wait awhile longer to learn which felons can vote — and just what constitutes "moral turpitude" — because a judge said Wednesday she may dismiss a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union over the issue.

With voter registration at record levels, county voter registrars have been struggling to figure out which ex-felons can sign up and which can't.

During a hearing Wednesday, Montgomery Circuit Judge Tracy McCooey told ACLU attorneys she is troubled that the ACLU's three plaintiffs filed suit before they filled out voter registration forms and were officially rejected by county voter registrars. ...

The ACLU filed the lawsuit in July on behalf of three ex-felons who want to vote in the Nov. 4 presidential election. One of the three had actually tried to register in Jefferson County, but was never given a form because a registrar told her she couldn't vote. -- Judge may dismiss Ala. lawsuit over felon voting

Posted by Ed at 6:22 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

A Birmingham News report begins: When James Solomon went to register to vote earlier this year, he said he was told he couldn't vote because of a past conviction for cocaine possession.

That was in direct contrast to advice given by the Secretary of State's Office that drug possession is not a crime that strips someone of their voting rights. ...

Less than a month shy of a historic election expected to bring record turnout, there still is uncertainty over who is eligible to vote in Alabama. State officials have given boards of registrars conflicting lists of felony convictions that bar a person from voting.

And registrars, already swamped with new voter applications, have the difficult task of sorting out who is and who isn't eligible to vote. ...

A statewide computer system for the past 11 months has been noting convictions for more than 400 crimes that Gov. Bob Riley's administration deemed to be felonies of moral turpitude - even though officials with the Administrative Office of Courts said they were assured by Riley's office only a shorter list of 70 felonies developed by the attorney general's office were being checked. -- Confusion reigns in Alabama over ex-felons' ability to vote - al.com

Posted by Ed at 7:20 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Birmingham News reports: Eligible Alabama voters are being wrongly denied the right to cast a ballot in the coming election because of the way Gov. Bob Riley's administration defines a crime of moral turpitude, state court administrators said Wednesday.

The Administrative Office of Courts sent a memo Tuesday to county probate judges, sheriffs and circuit clerks saying that people who should be allowed to vote have been stricken from the voter rolls based on information from Riley's administration over which felony convictions bar people from voting.

AOC Director Callie Dietz and Legal Director Griffin Sikes Jr. told election officials that they hoped the memo would help them identify people who have been wrongly denied their right to vote during the past 18 months and notify them that they are eligible to vote Nov. 4. ...

The dispute centers on what felony convictions bar people from voting in Alabama. The state constitution says people convicted of felony crimes of "moral turpitude" cannot vote until they get their rights restored. However, state law does not define a crime of moral turpitude.

The position of the governor's office is that 480 of the state's 575 felony crimes are crimes of moral turpitude. Emerson said the legal staff "put in hundreds of hours into researching both case law and statutory law to come up with a comprehensive list of crimes of moral turpitude."

The AOC Legal Division takes a stricter view and lists only 70 felonies that a court, Alabama law or the state attorney general's opinion have determined should bar someone from voting. -- State courts say Alabama wrongly bars people from voting - al.com

The memo is here.

Posted by Ed at 7:05 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Dan Filler comments on Faculty Lounge about this Washington Post story: The reality is that Obama, like all Democrats, is likely to benefit when convicted offenders are allowed to vote. At the same time, one thing Obama cannot afford is to be seen as a person seeking the felon vote - both because being a friend of criminals is bad political karma and because, in Obama s particular racialized position, this could have the effect of making him look like he s the candidate of Black criminals. This is a complicated position for Democrats. And it s going to get much more complicated as the election approaches.

If past elections are any guide, we can expect Republican election officials to work aggressively to weed out convicted felons from voting rolls. Sometimes - maybe even often - this effort will result in fully eligible voters being expunged from the rolls. Eligible voters will come in different types, most commonly those where there is a name mix-up and those who are convicted felons, but have - for one reason or another - regained the right to vote. But the very act of fighting for the rights of those entitled to vote who have been erroneously disenfranchised a much less politically charged project than Mitchell s work in Florida will trigger many of the complicated issues I ve discussed above. And the very fact that Obama may find it difficult to aggressively advocate for those entitled to vote may embolden Republicans to choose an extra-aggressive expungement strategy.

The Democrats cannot afford to abandon any of these prospective voters. And the Republicans may feel that they cannot afford to underenforce felon disenfranchisement laws - particularly in swing states - since these voters are likely to tilt to the left. But there are risks for everyone - including Republicans, who must worry that expungement strategies will be seen as explicitly designed to suppress African American vote numbers.

Keep your eyes open. I d be very surprised if this issue doesn t rear it s head, perhaps with some intensity, in the weeks before the election. -- The Faculty Lounge: Obama s Felon Disenfranchisement Challenge

Posted by Ed at 8:07 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Wall Street Journal report begins: As Barack Obama tries to draw hundreds of thousands of new voters to the polls, Republicans are beginning to scrutinize registrants' eligibility as both sides draw a major battle line over voting rights.

Republicans are moving to examine surges in voter registrations in some states. A Republican lawyers group held a national training session on election law over the weekend that included campaign attorneys for Sen. John McCain and other Republican leaders. One session discussed how party operatives can identify and respond to instances of voter fraud. ...

Obama campaign general counsel Bob Bauer last Tuesday said in a memorandum to campaign supporters that their own voter legal defense operation is under way, earlier than those of previous Democratic campaigns, including legal counsel on the ground in 50 states. The campaign is working closely with the Democratic Party, which said it has spent three years building a voter-protection program that includes more than 18 paid staff and 7,000 lawyers. The personnel deployed Aug. 1 and are dealing directly with local elections officials.

In just about every election, understaffed polling sites, malfunctioning voting machines and outdated voter data are reported. Such bureaucratic problems often are rolled into the divide between Democrats and Republicans over who should vote and how -- a battle that has become more intense since the 2000 Florida recount. -- Voter Registration Is the New Battleground - WSJ.com

Posted by Ed at 12:45 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The National Law Journal reports: The descendants of "Freedmen," former African slaves owned by the Cherokee Nation, may go forward with a lawsuit against the tribe's officers in which they claim they were barred from voting in two tribal elections because they lacked an ancestral link to the "Blood Roll" of native Cherokees, a federal appellate court has ruled.

A three-judge panel of the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia held on July 29 that the tribe itself was protected from suit by sovereign immunity, but that immunity did not extend to tribal officers. Vann v. Kempthorne, No. 07-5024.

The sovereign immunity question drew the panel back into the tribe's history, a history marked by a "stain" shared by the United States, it said: ownership of African slaves. In an 1866 treaty with the United States, the Cherokee Nation renounced slavery and involuntary servitude, and promised to extend "all the rights of native Cherokees" to the former Cherokee slaves, who came to be known as "Freedmen."

In 1896, Congress directed the Dawes Commission to create membership rolls for the so-called Five Civilized Tribes of Oklahoma, which included the Cherokee Nation. The rolls for the Cherokees, completed in 1907, resulted in two lists: a "Blood Roll" for native Cherokees, and a "Freedmen Roll" for former slaves and their descendants. The panel explained that the lists serve an important function because the tribal constitution of 1976 provides that citizenship in the Cherokee Nation must be proven by reference to the Dawes Commission Rolls. -- Law.com - Descendants of Former African Slaves Owned by Cherokee Nation May Proceed With Suit

Posted by Ed at 7:33 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Birmingham News reports: Jefferson County's Democrat and Republican parties will pick candidates by Aug. 6 in the court-ordered election for the County Commission's District 1 seat, a Circuit Court judge ruled Friday.

Independents can qualify to run if they get 914 signatures of District 1 voters by Aug. 27, according to a written decision filed by Circuit Judge Scott Vowell.

The Alabama Supreme Court ordered the Nov. 4 vote in a ruling about a months-long legal dispute over how to fill the commission vacancy created when Larry Langford resigned to become Birmingham mayor. ...

Vowell's order did not address whether officials would have to obtain clearance from the U.S. Justice Department under the Voting Rights Act of 1965. A lawyer for Attorney General Troy King said last week his office would seek clearance, but would appeal any order from Vowell setting a deadline. -- Parties told to pick candidates for Jefferson County Commission seat by Aug. 6- al.com

Disclosure: I represent one of the parties in this case.

Posted by Ed at 8:28 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Birmingham News reports: A lawsuit claims the state of Alabama is violating the constitutional rights of thousands of convicted felons by denying them the right to vote.

The suit, filed Monday by the American Civil Liberties Union and the ACLU of Alabama, contends that Alabama Secretary of State Beth Chapman and county registrars are wrongly requiring thousands of felons to apply to the Board of Pardons and Paroles to have voting rights restored. ...

The Alabama Constitution says people convicted of crimes of "moral turpitude" cannot vote until they get their rights restored. However, the state constitution does not define a crime of moral turpitude.

The Legislature in 2003 named 15 felonies that warrant the criminal losing his or her voting rights, and the ACLU's lawsuit asserts that only the Legislature can set voting requirements.

But ACLU lawyer Sam Brooke said his group believes local registrars are improperly going beyond that law and denying others the right to register, partly based on a 2005 opinion issued by the attorney general's office. -- ACLU lawsuit challenges Alabama voting practice- al.com

Attached are the complaint, motion for preliminary injunction, and motion for class certification. Thanks to the ACLU of Alabama for sending them to me.

Posted by Ed at 6:14 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Tampa Tribune reports: Two registered voters have filed a lawsuit in Pasco County challenging the write-in candidate "loophole" in state election law.

They say the provision unfairly closed the Aug. 26 primary election in a county commission race, effectively disenfranchising 170,000 registered Democrats, Independents and minor party voters in Pasco.

Florida voters approved a constitutional amendment in 1998 to let all voters participate in primaries if all candidates in a race come from the same political party. In 2000, however, the state Division of Elections ruled that the primary is not open if the race includes any write-in candidates, who are considered general election candidates.

State Sen. Dave Aronberg, D-Greenacres, has been working to close the loophole, which he said politicians are exploiting. -- Suit Targets Write-In Candidates Loophole

Posted by Ed at 7:26 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The New York Sun reports: As the federal citizenship agency and the FBI say they are picking up the pace to eliminate a backlog of citizenship applications, immigrants anticipating decisions on petitions they filed months, and in many cases years, earlier shouldn't necessarily be resting easier.

Some lawyers who handle naturalization cases say U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services adjudicators appear to be more eager to reject citizenship applications of late, meaning some of those aiming to be citizens in time to vote in the presidential elections in November may find themselves left out. ...

The number of denials on dubious legal grounds seems to have ticked upward, according to some lawyers in New York.

An immigration attorney at the firm Bretz & Coven, Matthew Guadagno, said he has handled a slew of recent cases in which he said applicants were denied unfairly for long-ago criminal convictions or for mistakes on their application forms, which he says the USCIS sometimes labels fraud even if the mistakes are inadvertent. -- Citizenship Backlog Could Thwart Would-Be Voters - June 18, 2008 - The New York Sun

Posted by Ed at 8:22 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Washington Post reports: Civic and social organizations are teaming with Virginia Gov. Timothy M. Kaine to try to add thousands of nonviolent offenders to the voting rolls in time for the November election, a move that has angered Republicans who say the effort is designed to help Democratic Sen. Barack Obama s presidential campaign.

Under Virginia s constitution, people convicted of a felony automatically lose their right to vote for life, which has resulted in an estimated 300,000 residents being disenfranchised, even though they are not in prison.

But a Virginia governor can restore a felon s voting rights. Under a process set up by former governor Mark R. Warner D , felons convicted of nonviolent crimes can apply to have their voting rights restored if they have a clean record for three years after their sentence has been completed. People convicted of violent felonies, which in Virginia includes selling drugs, have to wait five years.

Earlier this year, Kaine D promised that his administration would expedite a review of applications from nonviolent felons who submit their papers by Aug. 1. -- Groups Push to Restore Va. Felons Voting Rights - washingtonpost.com

Posted by Ed at 7:20 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Herald reports: The SNP government is determined to give 16-year-olds the vote and is demanding that Westminster hand over the power to allow this, it was claimed yesterday.

The minister for parliamentary business told an electoral reform conference yesterday that the government was determined to press ahead with a staged approach, first giving youngsters the right to vote in health board elections and then progressing that to council and Holyrood polls.

But this would require a change in the law at Westminster and there was no indication yesterday that the Ministry of Justice was minded to consider such a change.
advertisement

Bruce Crawford, Minister for Parliament, told the Electoral Reform Society that ministers had a plan to extend the franchise in order to re-engage young citizens, and avoid the current anomalies faced by young adults. -- SNP in move to lower voting age to 16

Posted by Ed at 6:46 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Sacramento Bee reports: Voting is as American as mom and apple pie – the more votes cast, the better for democracy, right?

Not necessarily.

Efforts to gradually increase California's pool of voters by targeting young teenagers are splitting the Capitol along party lines.

Democrats support, Republicans oppose.

"There's red apple pie and blue apple pie," quipped John J. Pitney, government professor at Claremont McKenna College.

The issue came to a head recently with Assembly Bill 1819, which would allow 16- and 17-year-olds to preregister to vote, qualifying them automatically when they reach 18. -- Politics - Parties split over teen voting bill - sacbee.com

Posted by Ed at 7:58 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

AP reports: The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has overturned a ruling that would have forced Mississippians to register by political party and to show photo identification at the polls to be able to vote.

The Mississippi Democratic Party sued in 2006 to keep non-Democrats from voting in its primaries. -- WLOX-TV and WLOX.com - Building South Mississippi Together |This Hour: Latest Mississippi news, sports, business and entertainment:

Thanks to Steve Rankin for sending me the opinion. Here are the first two paragraphs of the opinion:

Plaintiffs Mississippi Democratic Party and Mississippi Democratic Executive Committee filed a declaratory judgment action seeking to overturn as unconstitutional Mississippi’s semi-closed primary1 statute, Miss. Code Ann. § 23-15-575. They succeeded beyond their expectations when the district court declared the statute unconstitutional and fashioned a sweeping injunction. that required not only party registration but also photo identification in order to vote in a party’s primary. The court’s ruling spawned a free-for-all on appeal. Plaintiffs themselves cross-appeal the mandatory photo ID requirement. Intervenors NAACP and the Mississippi Republican Executive Committee also challenge separate portions of the decree. The state is divided: defendant Mississippi Attorney General Jim Hood argues that plaintiffs’ claims are not justiciable, while governor Haley Barbour and the Secretary of State have filed a brief supporting photo IDs for voters. In the meantime, the state legislature has been debating changes in the primary law. We will put the parties out of their litigation misery.

Because plaintiffs failed to demonstrate that their claims involve an actual case or controversy, the claims were not justiciable and should not have been addressed by the district court. The judgment is REVERSED and the injunction VACATED.

Posted by Ed at 5:24 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Daily Journal reports: When asked about his favorite candidate in this year s presidential race, 31-year-old Steven Hubbard didn t hesitate to say, "Obama's my man."

But that's where his political voice ends. Hubbard, a convicted felon from Tupelo, is one of nearly 150,000 inmates and convicted felons in Mississippi who've lost their right to vote, nearly 7 percent of the state s adult population.

Even though he doesn't deny guilt for the forgery conviction that caused him to lose his right to vote, Hubbard said stripping him of his right to vote while he was in prison was un-American.

"I committed a crime and I paid my debt to society for that crime by serving time in prison," said Hubbard. "But when I was released, my punishment didn't end. Being stripped of the right to vote is not fair to convicted felons who pay their debt to society and serve the time given to them by the courts. It's almost like I was exiled from the country. If I can't vote, then I can't be an American, right?"

Mississippi has a procedure that would allow Hubbard to have his rights restored. But with the presidential election less than six months away, some people have begun to wonder about the effect of having so many voting-age Americans disenfranchised, particularly black voters. -- Groups debate whether felons should regain the right to vote

Posted by Ed at 8:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

AP reports: Although immigration officials in Phoenix are churning out record numbers of new U.S. citizens, critics say federal officials aren t working fast enough so many immigrants won t become citizens in time to vote in November.

The Phoenix office for Citizenship and Immigration Services plans to grant citizenship to 2,000 legal immigrants this month, more than twice the usual 800 for May.

Charles Harrell, acting district director of the CIS office in Phoenix, said the immigration service is responding to a surge of applications that poured in last year.

Citizenship applications spike every four years preceding a presidential election, but the record surge last year was triggered by various immigration-related factors, including a 70 percent fee increase that prompted thousands of immigrants to apply before the increase took effect Aug. 1. -- Feds coping with backlog for U.S. citizenship before election

Posted by Ed at 8:10 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Star Press reports: A first-time voter said he was not permitted to vote in Tuesday s Democratic Primary because a poll inspector believed he was a Republican.

The reason the poll inspector believed Ball State University student Kyle Ellis, 21, was a Republican was because Ellis told the inspector he registered to vote as a Republican.

"I realize now that is incorrect," Ellis said Wednesday.
It's a common misconception that Indiana voters declare political affiliation when they register to vote. Instead, voters decide party affiliation in primary elections when they choose whether to vote in the Democratic or Republican primary.

The concept is known as an "open primary."

Having never voted before, Ellis would have never officially declared an affiliation with either party before Tuesday's election. -- Voter says he was banned from casting Democratic ballot | The Star Press - www.thestarpress.com - Muncie, IN

Posted by Ed at 7:39 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Leaf Chronicle reports: A Clarksville woman has been arrested on three counts of illegal voting.

Carla Thomas Smith, 36, who gave a 718-1/2 Central Ave. address, was booked Friday into the Montgomery County Jail and has since been released on a $1,000 bond.

According to court documents, Smith has a felony conviction, which deprives her of voting rights. ...

The indictment against Smith alleges she broke the law when she registered to vote in August 2004, when she voted in November 2004 and when she voted in November 2006. -- Woman arrested on 3 counts of illegal voting | theleafchronicle.com | The Leaf Chronicle

Posted by Ed at 7:44 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Hill reports: Members of the Congressional Black Caucus have promised Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid D-Nev. that they will try to block a Native American housing assistance bill if the measure does not include language that prevents the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma from receiving any of the benefits.

The House included such a prohibition in its Indian housing assistance bill passed in September. But the Senate version does not include similar language. ...

The dispute between the CBC and the Cherokee Nation arose last year after the tribe amended its constitution to exclude the Freedmen — a group of freed slaves who have been members since the Civil-War era – from tribal membership. Black lawmakers have charged the tribe is ignoring the Treaty of 1886, an agreement the Cherokees signed with the U.S. government that gave tribal citizenship to the Freedmen. ...

Cherokee leaders argue that as a sovereign nation they have a right to amend their own constitution. -- TheHill.com - CBC warns Reid on Cherokee funds

Posted by Ed at 7:53 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The New York Times reports: Immigration officials said on Friday that they expected to complete about 930,000 citizenship applications in the fiscal year ending Sept. 30, reducing a huge backlog in a time frame that would allow many new citizens to register to vote in the November elections.

The projection from the federal Citizenship and Immigration Services agency came as its director, Emilio T. Gonzalez, praised his staff in a statement, saying it had reduced overall waiting times for immigrants seeking to become American citizens to a maximum of 16 months, from an 18-month projection Mr. Gonzalez made in January.

But the agency’s internal figures on the applications that remain in the pipeline indicate that to meet its goal it will have to work much faster than it has in recent months. Of 1,051,186 naturalization applications the agency is processing, 75 percent are still in the early phases of being logged in and placed in line for scheduling of several required steps, the figures show.

Only 262,780 applications are in the time-consuming later phases, when applicants must submit fingerprints and pass required background checks, and English and civics tests, according to the figures, which were provided by Congressional staff members. -- Goal Set for Reducing Backlog on Citizenship Applications - New York Times

Posted by Ed at 11:59 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The New York Times reports: A lawsuit filed Thursday in a federal court in New York by Latino immigrants seeks to force immigration authorities to complete hundreds of thousands of stalled naturalization petitions in time for the new citizens to vote in November.

The class-action suit was brought by the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund on behalf of legal Hispanic immigrants in the New York City area who are eager to vote and have been waiting for years for the federal Citizenship and Immigration Services agency to finish their applications. The suit demands that the agency meet a nationwide deadline of Sept. 22 to complete any naturalization petitions filed by March 26.

Latino groups hope to summon the clout of the federal courts to compel the Bush administration to reduce a backlog of citizenship applications that swelled last year. According to the Migration Policy Institute, a nonpartisan research group in Washington, more than one million citizenship petitions were backed up in the pipeline by the end of December, the majority from Latino immigrants.

Despite protests over the delays from lawmakers, Latino groups and immigrant advocates, the immigration agency is currently projecting wait times of 16 months to 18 months to process the petitions. -- Latinos Seek Citizenship in Time for Voting - New York Times

Posted by Ed at 7:18 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Herald-Leader reports: Felons who complete their sentences can get their voting rights restored more easily under changes to the pardon process announced Tuesday by Gov. Steve Beshear.

Beshear said he will drop requirements for an essay and three character references, both imposed by previous Gov. Ernie Fletcher. He also will revoke a $2 fee.

Under the "barriers" placed by Fletcher, the number of felons whose voting rights were restored shrank from more than 600 a year to about 250 a year. ...

About 129,000 Kentuckians can't vote because of a felony conviction, Beshear said. He said corrections officials will help interested felons with pardon applications before their release from prison or jail, and his office will process more than 1,500 applications left behind by Fletcher, plus 176 new applications filed since Jan. 1. -- Restoring voting rights eased

Posted by Ed at 9:21 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The New York Times reports: The Rev. Kenneth Glasgow, onetime criminal and founder of a ministry called The Ordinary People Society, spent years helping people with criminal records regain the right to vote in Alabama, where an estimated 250,000 people are prohibited from voting because of past criminal activity.

Then he discovered that many of them had never actually lost the right.

Because of a quirk in its Constitution, Alabama disqualifies from voting only those who have committed a “felony involving moral turpitude.” Those who have committed other felonies — like marijuana possession or drunken driving — can cast ballots even if they are still in prison, according to the state attorney general.

But it has been slow work cajoling public officials to enforce and publicize the law. Until Friday, the secretary of state’s Web site advised, incorrectly, that those with any kind of felony conviction could not register unless they had served their time and their right to vote had been restored by the Board of Pardons and Paroles.

Because neither the Legislature nor the attorney general has offered a definitive list of crimes involving moral turpitude, there is no way of knowing how many inmates are eligible to vote. But state agencies generally agree that those convicted of drug possession — at least 3,000 of Alabama’s 29,000 prison inmates and thousands more on probation — are eligible. Most felons and former felons, however, assume that they have lost the right to vote. -- In Alabama, a Fight to Regain Voting Rights Some Felons Never Lost - New York Times

Posted by Ed at 1:35 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The New York Times reports: The conventional political wisdom in delegate-rich California is that the roughly three million registered voters without a party affiliation are ripe for the picking by the Democratic candidates for president.

Democrats began allowing independents to participate in their party’s presidential primary in 2004, and campaigns now see them — the fastest-growing group of registrants in California — as potentially pushing a candidate over the top in the primary on Feb. 5. ...

(Republicans only allow their own party members to vote; the state’s American Independent Party also allows decline-to-state voters to cast ballots in its primary, but the party’s presence is very small.) ...

It is also true that decline-to-state voters must be quite motivated — and knowledgeable — to cast a ballot in the Democratic primary. The voters must ask for a Democratic ballot at their polling station; otherwise, they are provided with a nonpartisan ballot that has statewide measures only. -- California’s Unaffiliated Voters Are Sometimes Unreachable

Posted by Ed at 7:44 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

WSFA TV reports: An organization working to restore the voting rights of ex-felons is touring the state. On Tuesday, the Let My People Vote Campaign stopped in Montgomery to get their message out.

For the past five years the Let My People Vote campaign has traveled to prisons educating and informing current and ex-prisoners that certain felonies should not result in a loss of voting rights. -- WSFA TV Montgomery, AL - Let My People Vote Campaign Stops in the Capitol City

Posted by Ed at 5:49 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Miami Herald reports: As the nation celebrated the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.'s quest for justice, Gov. Charlie Crist was honored Monday for reforming state clemency rules and helping the family of Martin Lee Anderson, the black teenager who died in a North Florida boot camp.

Crist said he was humbled by accolades at the 15th annual Martin Luther King Jr. Unity Breakfast at Jungle Island in Miami. ...

Last year, the Board of Executive Clemency, chaired by Crist, approved a rule change that almost automatically restores the civil rights of many ex-offenders who have completed their sentences. The change does not apply to murderers and sex offenders.

State Sen. Frederica Wilson said the group honored Crist not only for his support of Anderson's family but also for his efforts to make it easier for Floridians convicted of minor crimes to recover their right to vote. Crist promised black leaders he would work on the issue during his gubernatorial campaign, she said. -- Crist is hailed as civil rights hero - 01/22/2008 - MiamiHerald.com

Posted by Ed at 8:07 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

NPR's All Things Considered reports: Shortly after he was elected a year ago, Florida Gov. Charlie Crist pushed through changes that make it easier for released felons to get their civil rights restored. That process, though, has left many dissatisfied.

Only about 45,000 of some 950,000 people eligible have had their voting rights restored. The ACLU and other groups have been holding seminars to reach out to felons and have started a campaign to get them registered to vote. -- NPR : Florida Falls Short in Restoring Felons' Voting Rights

Posted by Ed at 7:45 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

AP reports: Tens of thousands of Floridians will be barred from voting in the 2008 national election if a state voter registration law is allowed to go back into effect, lawyers for minority groups said Friday.

In a hearing before a panel of the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta, lawyers for the Florida NAACP and other groups asked that a temporary injunction against the 2005 law stay in place.

The law requires that information on voter applications match driver's license or Social Security card databases. Florida officials - still haunted by the election of 2000 - say the law is a centerpiece of their efforts to prevent fraud and restore public confidence in the electoral process.

But the law created a system in which a simple mistake on a voter registration application can knock would-be voters out of an election, even if the present a valid driver's license or passport.

"If the injunction is not upheld and if the law is allowed to take effect, tens of thousands of Florida residents will be denied their right to vote because of a typo," said Justin Levitt, the New York-based lawyer arguing on behalf of the Florida NAACP and its co-plainitffs. --

Posted by Ed at 3:34 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Michael Scherer writes on Salon's '08 Roadies blog: The clock is ticking on the Iowa caucuses, with just 22 days before zero hour, which means it's time to address the ever-present specter of electoral fraud. For decades, the Iowa caucuses have been relatively clean affairs, unlike in South Carolina, where muck rules. In part, this has to do with the process itself, which is so Byzantine that for Democrats it looks more like musical chairs than voting. (For those who want to understand how it works, see here and here.)

But there is a bad moon rising. For several weeks now, David Yepsen, the reigning dean of the Iowa political press, has been writing columns that portend evil on the horizon. At the end of November, he wrote a column titled "The Illinois Caucus," which led with these ominous words:

Barack Obama's campaign is telling Iowa college students they can caucus for him even if they aren't from Iowa. His campaign offers that advice in a brochure being distributed on college campuses in the state. A spokesman said it's legal and that 50,000 of the fliers are being distributed. The brochure says: "If you are not from Iowa, you can come back for the Iowa caucus and caucus in your college neighborhood."

Sounds scary and outrageous, right? It's not. Iowa law is very clear. Out-of-state students attending Iowa schools are allowed to caucus, as long as they don't also vote or caucus in their home state. Never mind what the "spokesman said." But this fact did not assuage Yepsen. He argues that the law is not the point. "These are the Iowa caucuses," he continues. "Asking people who are 'not from Iowa' to participate in them changes the nature of the event." -- '08 Roadies - Salon

Posted by Ed at 7:50 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Washington Post reports: The loyalty pledge to the Republican Party that Virginia voters will be required to sign if they vote in the state's GOP presidential primary on Feb. 12 is another attempt by the party to police the open primary system.

On Feb. 12, a GOP primary voter will have to sign a piece of paper that says, "I, the undersigned, pledge that I intend to support the nominee of the Republican Party for President."

Party officials said Wednesday they are worried that Democrats and independents have infiltrated past GOP nominating contests. The state does not require voters to register by political party, which means a voter can decide on the day of the primary whether to participate in the Republican or Democratic primary.

Political analysts say it is rare for a partisan voter aligned with one party to vote in the other party's nominating contest. But some conservatives say Democrats and independents helped Sen. John W. Warner (R-Va.) win his 1996 primary against James C. Miller III. In 2000, Arizona Sen. John McCain (R) urged Democrats and independents to vote for him in Virginia's GOP presidential primary. But McCain lost to George W. Bush by 59,000 votes. -- Virginia GOP Gets Strict on Voting - washingtonpost.com

Update (6 Dec 2007) from Rosanna Bencoach, Policy Manager, Virginia State Board of Elections: The party’s State Central Committee on 11/30 voted to not require a pledge, overturning the request made by the party’s Chairman a few weeks earlier. The request to rescind the party’s previous request for a pledge still needs to be submitted to the State Board of Elections and formally acted on by the Board at its next meeting on 12/20.

The state law allowing the political parties to request that presidential primaries be held also allows the party to require such a pledge (Code of Virginia § 24.2-545). The provision was put in the law to allow for different and changing national party rules on delegate selection and binding. Pledges are not allowed or required in Virginia primaries for other offices, but may be (and have been) required by party rules for non-primary nominating events. Virginia has open primaries, and any voter may vote in either primary (but not in both primaries held on the same day).

To try to clear up confusion in various articles, some reporters stated that the requirement to sign the pledge before receiving the ballot was “unenforceable.” In fact, it was the content of the pledge – the promise to support the party’s nominee for president in the upcoming election – that was unenforceable. If the pledge had not been rescinded, local election officials would have been instructed that they could not provide the Republican primary ballot to any voter until they had signed the required pledge, as was last done in the 2000 Republican presidential primary in Virginia.

Posted by Ed at 6:45 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Update: WTVM NBC 13 reports: Evidence included a list of Langford's personal checks, utility bills, even a pay-per-view TV receipt showing Langford's Fairfield address of 26 years, and dated after Langford says he moved to Birmingham.

Cooper, who seemed at times to be representing himself with whispers and calls for information on a computer screen, even propped up a former campaign volunteer who told a judge he rarely saw Langford's car outside his north Birmingham loft, and talked with Cooper about going to ask Fairfield neighbors if Langford stayed at that home more often. Langford and his lawyers seemed furious, after Cooper’s previous public statements that he did not know whether a campaign worker had made visits to Langford’s neighbors, or watched his house to see living arrangements.

Defense lawyers got the man to admit he did not know Langford used an indoor parking garage at his loft, making the testimony about Langford’s car-parking habits seem hardly useful. -- Cooper Takes Latest Legal Swing at New Mayor

==============
The Birmingham News reports: A Jefferson County judge declined to dismiss Patrick Cooper's lawsuit challenging Larry Langford's qualilfications to run for Birmingham mayor but did not rule this morning on whether Langford can serve as mayor.

Circuit Court Judge Allwin Horn spent most of this morning hearing testimony about whether Langford officially moved to Birmingham or continued to live in Fairfield. -- Judge hears challenge to Larry Langford's qualifications to run for mayor - Breaking News from The Birmingham News - al.com

The News also has links to the complaint and answer.

Posted by Ed at 9:25 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Following up on the story here, the suit by 71 Idaho Republicans seeking to force the Secretary of State to follow the GOP rule on eligibility to vote in the primary, the court will hear the GOP plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction and the State's motion to dismiss on Thursday, 15 November. For all the scoop, go to Grassroots Idaho GOP

Thanks again to Steve Rankin for keeping me informed on this suit.

Posted by Ed at 7:02 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

AP reports: Robert Greene had no problem three years ago voting for president in this college town where he studies linguistics. Now he’s fighting for the same right to vote in a city council race.

When he went to the polls Tuesday night, election workers steered the 21-year-old into a line of other Georgia Southern University students whose voter eligibility had been challenged by a small group of residents. ...

Georgia Southern students, including Greene, account for nearly all the 297 voters whose ballots have been blocked, at least temporarily, in a “town vs. gown” battle for control of Statesboro City Council.

Four residents calling themselves Statesboro Citizens for Good Government want the ballots thrown out. They say Georgia Southern students can’t legally register to vote in Statesboro unless it’s their hometown. ...

The winners of two city council elections won’t be decided until the Bulloch County Board of Registrars resolves the dispute, which will require 297 hearings — one for each challenged voter. The board may not finish before 2008. -- Locals challenge students’ voter rights

Posted by Ed at 7:14 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Glen Falls, NY, Post Star reports: When Richard Hayes Phillips tried to vote in Dresden on Tuesday morning, he probably wasn’t interested in the outcome of the local races.

Phillips, a researcher who investigates election chicanery, was trying to prove that anyone who owns property in one locality can vote there — even if they don’t live in the area year-round.

But now Phillips, who has looked into voter fraud allegations in Ohio during the 2004 presidential election, could face perjury charges, according to Washington County Attorney Roger Wickes. ...

At issue is Phillips’ registering to vote in Dresden, despite already being signed up to cast a ballot in St. Lawrence County.

When filling out his voter registration form before Election Day, Phillips stated his primary residence was an address in Dresden. But on Tuesday, Phillips apparently said he didn’t live in the Washington County town, according to witnesses.

And since the form doubles as an affidavit, providing false information on the document could be considered perjury, Wickes said. -- PostStar.com

Posted by Ed at 8:52 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Asbury Park Press reports: Should New Jersey say that "no idiot or insane person shall enjoy the right of suffrage?"

"Others," said state Senate President Richard J. Codey, D-Essex, "would say there should be language in the Constitution to prevent people from voting FOR idiots."

On the sober side, Codey has been the force behind state Public Question No. 4 on Tuesday's ballot — which calls for changing the language of the state Constitution, dumping the terms "idiot" and "insane." ...

In 1976, the appellate division of Superior Court ruled that "idiot" and "insane" lack any legal definition.

The ballot question would replace the present wording with the statement that a person would be barred from voting if that person "has been adjudicated by a court of competent jurisdiction to lack the capacity to understand the act of voting." -- Constitution denies "idiots" right to vote

Posted by Ed at 8:32 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

AP reports: A dispute involving race and tribal identity that was supposed to play out in the courts now seems headed for Capitol Hill, where some lawmakers want the country's second-largest Indian tribe stripped of $300 million in federal money.

U.S. Rep. Diane Watson, a California Democrat who claims Indian blood and ties to Oklahoma, is demanding the Cherokee Nation reinstate 2,800 descendants of the tribe's former black slaves, known as freedmen. She calls a March election that booted the freedmen descendants from the tribe ``ethnic cleansing'' and doesn't want to wait on the courts to decide the matter, a process that could take years.

The tribe is digging in to fight the legislation, and its chief, Chad Smith, has called Watson's bill a ``scorched-earth'' policy aimed at hurting the poorest and sickest of the nation's 270,000 members.

Neither side shows signs of giving up ground as lawmakers are expected to have a hearing on the matter next week in Washington. -- KOTV.com - The News On 6

Posted by Ed at 7:55 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Texas Lawyer reports: Three days after Karl Rove, deputy chief of staff at the White House, announced he will resign at the end of August, an attorney filed a suit in the 53rd District Court in Travis County, Texas, alleging that she was fired from the Texas Office of the Secretary of State for making comments to a reporter that embarrassed Rove and other Republicans.

Elizabeth Reyes filed Reyes v. Williams, et al. on Aug. 16. In her original petition, Reyes contends that the alleged reason for her termination in September 2005 was violating the Office of the Secretary of State's policy and procedures manual on press calls when she spoke to a Washington Post reporter about whether Rove's ownership of two rental cottages in Texas' Kerr County qualified him to vote in that county.

But Reyes alleges that she was fired because the statements attributed to her in the Post article -- that a county prosecutor could go after someone who votes in a place where he doesn't live -- caused political embarrassment for defendants Roger Williams, then-secretary of state, and H.S. "Buddy" Garcia, then-deputy secretary of state. -- Law.com - Lawyer Sues Rove, Former Texas Officials Over Firing

Posted by Ed at 7:17 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The blog Grassroots Idaho GOP reproduces this press release: 71 members of the Idaho Republican Party, including a number of members of the Idaho Republican Party State Central Committee and Executive Committee filed suit in the U. S. Federal Court in Boise, Idaho to require the State of Idaho and its Chief Election Officer, Ben Ysursa, Idaho Secretary of State, to honor the Rule adopted by the Idaho Republican Party on June 2, 2007.

Idahoans are still entitled to the basic protections and rights offered by the U.S. Constitution 220 years ago, including the right of association under the First Amendment. It is our intent to ask the court to restore those rights so that Idaho Republicans may stand together and pick their own nominees for political office, just as Idaho Democrats are allowed to stand together and pick their nominee for U.S. president. -- Grassroots Idaho GOP’ers file suit in Federal Court

Thanks to Steve Rankin for the link.

Posted by Ed at 3:36 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

The Detroit News reports: The sponsor of a proposal to extend voting rights to some 17-year-olds in Michigan says he thinks chances of its passage are growing. ...

Under Caul's proposal, 17-year-olds would be allowed to vote in a primary if they'll turn 18 before the November general election. The 2000 Census found there were about 143,500 17-year-olds in Michigan.

The resolution, awaiting a vote in the House Ethics and Elections Committee, would have to be approved by a two-thirds vote in the House and Senate. If that happens, voters will decide the amendment in November 2008. -- Proposal would let some age 17 vote

Posted by Ed at 7:39 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

AP reports: Legislation proposing to sever U.S. relations with the Cherokee Nation and cut off the tribe's ability to conduct gaming operations could be introduced in Congress soon.

U.S. Rep. Diane Watson, D-Calif., has circulated a draft of the measure, which was spurred on by a March election that temporarily stripped Cherokee membership from descendants of people the tribe owned as slaves. The legislation would cut off tribal funding from several federal agencies, suspend the Cherokees' gaming authority and allow any descendant of the so-called freedmen to sue the tribe in federal court.

In a March 3 special election, Cherokee voters approved a constitutional amendment to remove about 2,800 freedmen descendants from the tribe's rolls - and therefore eliminate their eligibility for medical and other services provided by the tribe. That vote has been challenged in the federal and tribal court systems. -- Legislation would cut funding for Cherokees : ICT [2007/06/25]

Posted by Ed at 7:12 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The New York Times reports: Behind the barbed wire and thick walls of the state mental hospital here are two patients who have not been allowed to live in the outside world for 20 years. Both were found not guilty of murder by reason of insanity.

Still, they have voted in elections nearly every two years, casting ballots by mail. Now, however, election officials are taking steps that could ban them from voting, arguing that state law denies the vote to people with such serious psychiatric impairments. ...

Rhode Island is among a growing number of states grappling with the question of who is too mentally impaired to vote. The issue is drawing attention for two major reasons: increasing efforts by the mentally ill and their advocates to secure voting rights, and mounting concern by psychiatrists and others who work with the elderly about the rights and risks of voting by people with conditions like Alzheimer’s disease and dementia.

This summer, recommendations for national standards will be released by a group of psychiatrists, lawyers and others led by the American Bar Association, suggesting that people be prevented from voting only if they cannot indicate, with or without help, “a specific desire to participate in the voting process.” -- States Face Decisions on Who Is Mentally Fit to Vote

Posted by Ed at 5:31 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Muskogee Phoenix reports: A federal court in Washington, D.C., denied a motion Wednesday by six Cherokee Freedmen to halt the June 23 Cherokee election.

The freedmen filed for the injunction five days after they were stripped of their Cherokee citizenship during a special election March 3.

A Cherokee Nation District Court later reinstated their citizenship and ruled they could vote in the June 23 tribal election.

U.S. District Judge Henry Kennedy denied the injunction based on that tribal court reinstatement. -- Feds won’t stop Cherokee election

Posted by Ed at 7:17 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Jackson Clarion-Ledger reports: Mississippi Democrats may have paid a high price for winning the court fight to close primaries to registered party voters: a voter ID mandate they've fought for years to block.

The party filed suit last year against the three-member Mississippi Election Commission seeking to close primaries and allow only registered Democrats to cast ballots.

U.S District Judge Allen Pepper granted their request Friday but added a twist: Legislators need to require voter identification by April 1.

He threw in added pressure by declaring no 2008 party primaries will be held until the system is revamped, meaning the Democratic and Republican presidential primaries in March could be impacted.

Both sides of the case may ask Pepper to reconsider his decision to require voter identification - an issue Democrats have steadfastly opposed. -- Primary ruling a mixed bag for Dems

Posted by Ed at 8:55 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Muskogee Phoenix reports: Cherokee Freedmen say temporary reinstatement and the right to vote in the June 23 tribal election is not enough and will seek injunctive relief in a Monday hearing.

The hearing will be in federal court in Washington, D.C., before U.S. District Judge Henry Kennedy, who has been presiding over the federal case.

The tribe’s March special election stripping the Freedmen of their tribal membership “denied us the right to run for election — a right we’ve had since 1866,” said Marilyn Vann, of Oklahoma City, president of the Descendants of Freedmen Association.

“They (Cherokees ) are trying to erase our identity as Cherokees. We may have the right to vote now, but we will have no Freedmen candidates to vote for.” -- Freedmen seek injunction against Cherokees in case

Posted by Ed at 6:25 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Richard Winger announced on Ballot Access News:
On June 8, a US District Court Judge in Mississippi ruled in favor of the Democratic Party. The issue was whether the party could require voters in its primary to be members or not. The judge, a Clinton appointee, gave the legislature until April 2008 to find a way to give the Democratic Party what is wanted. This could be a law requiring registration by party, but the judge did not say that particular solution is needed. The case is Miss. State Dem. Party v Barbour, civil action no. 4:06cv29-P-B, Judge W. Allen Pepper.

By cooperation with Richard, I can make the opinion available here.

Posted by Ed at 3:13 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

AP reports: The Alabama Supreme Court ruled Friday that a Jefferson County judge who had ordered the state to allow ex-felons to vote had exceeded his authority in recasting the case to focus on crimes of "moral turpitude."

The justices set aside the decision of Circuit Court Judge Robert Vance Jr., who last August said a state constitutional amendment that denies voting rights to felons convicted of crimes of moral turpitude does not identify which crimes fit that definition. Vance ruled they should be allowed to vote until the state legislature specifies what crimes apply.

But the state Supreme Court ruled that there was "no evidence indicating that anyone (in this case) has been disfranchised as the result of a decision on the merits applying the definition of moral turpitude."

The case was never about the definition of moral turpitude, the court ruled. On the contrary, the court said, it was "undisputed" that the plaintiffs had been denied the right to register without any concern as to the specific nature of their felonies. -- Voting felons dispute decided

Comment: The decision of the Court is here. As one of the attorneys for the plaintiffs, allow me to give my view of the Court's decision.

Basically, the whole case turned on the fact that the Attorney General of Alabama is not just the lawyer for the Secretary of State, but also the official who gets to decide what the position of "the State" should be in court. So, as soon as AG entered the case for "the State" and agreed with the plaintiffs about the meaning of the Alabama Constitution's voter qualification provision, the Supreme Court holds that the controversy was over.

Even though we lost the case, getting the Attorney General to agree with our position should turn out to be valuable in the long run.

Posted by Ed at 5:09 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Capitol Media Services reports: Five Arizona felons filed suit Thursday challenging state laws that keep them from voting because of their criminal convictions.

The lawsuit filed in federal court in Phoenix by the American Civil Liberties Union challenges a state law that denies certain rights to those who have been convicted of at least two felonies. These felons can vote only by getting permission from a judge.

Alessandra Soler Meetze, director of the ACLU's Arizona chapter, says this is the first lawsuit in the nation seeking to overturn any state law that automatically disfranchises felons.

The legal papers separately challenge another Arizona law that says those convicted of a single felony can vote, but only after they have paid all court fines and restitution.

"Denying the right to vote based on one's failure or inability to pay legal financial obligations is the modern equivalent of a poll tax and serves no compelling or legitimate governmental interest," the lawsuit states. -- ACLU sues to restore vote to some felons

Update: A copy of the complaint in the case is attached.

Posted by Ed at 7:38 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

AP reports: The Cherokee Nation says a lawsuit by descendants of Cherokee slaves to stop the tribe's general election next month should be tossed because they already have the right to vote.

The descendants are commonly called "freedmen" and earlier this month filed a motion to stop the tribe's June 23rd election in which Chief Chad Smith is running for re-election. -- Cherokees ask for motion by freedmen descendants to be tossed

Posted by Ed at 7:30 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Sequoyah County Times reports: The Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) recently notified Cherokee Nation that they will not approve a 2003 tribal constitutional amendment that removed the federal government from the tribe's constitutional approval process.

This move by the BIA could void a controversial March vote on another tribal constitutional amendment that essentially removed Freedmen descendants from the Cherokee Nation's tribal rolls. Since that March vote, a tribal injunction has been approved while Freedmen descendants battle against the vote in court.

The Cherokee Nation announced Tuesday that they received notification from BIA officials denying approval of the 2003 constitutional amendment, which was implemented by a tribal court order nearly a year ago. In 2003, tribal citizens voted to amend the 1976 version of the constitution to remove federal oversight. Also in 2003, Cherokees voted in their general election to adopt the tribe's 1999 constitution. ...

But according to the tribe, the Cherokee Nation was not seeking approval from the BIA, adding that tribal courts have ruled that Cherokee Nation could take away the approval authority it had granted the federal government. -- BIA denies approval of tribal amendment

Posted by Ed at 7:45 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Salt Lake Tribune reports: There's one sure thing in the debate over giving Utah a fourth U.S. House seat and the District of Columbia its first full-voting member: legal scholars completely disagree on the plan's constitutionality.
For some, the bill is patently wrong, "the most premeditated unconstitutional act by Congress in decades," as one professor has repeatedly testified.
For others, it's clear the founding fathers didn't intend for nearly 600,000 residents of the nation's capital to go without representation in Congress.
Wednesday, several scholars testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee on the measure primarily meant to give the largely Democratic district a voice in Congress but balanced with a seat for Republican-dominated Utah. -- Salt Lake Tribune - Legal scholars disagree on bill's constitutionality

Posted by Ed at 7:43 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Tahlequah Daily Press reports: The Cherokee Nation Election Commission has agreed to re-open voter registration for non-Indians whose citizenship status is under review following the recent passage of a constitutional amendment.

The Election Commission’s decision was enacted by a court order signed by Judge John Cripps of Cherokee Nation District Court Friday, but was quickly followed by a motion to intervene filed by Marion Hagerstrand, a tribal citizen.

Hagerstrand is asking the court to re-open the 10-day voter registration period for Freedmen to all Cherokees, and believes excluding them would have an adverse affect on the upcoming June 23 tribal election.

The non-Indians’ citizenship in the Cherokee Nation was re-instated last week, pending resolution of all citizenship appeals, by a temporary injunction granted by a tribal court. The injunction permits eligible members of the group to vote in the Cherokee Nation election on June 23. The Election Commission agreed that those affected by the temporary injunction should have equal opportunity to register to vote. The order also opens absentee ballot requests for people affected by the injunction granting temporary citizenship. -- Tribal judge signs order, citizen seeks revision

Posted by Ed at 6:56 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Muskogee Phoenix reports: The attorney general of the Cherokee Nation agreed to a temporary injunction in tribal court Monday that allows descendants of the tribe’s slaves to maintain their citizenship while they appeal the constitutionality of an election that rescinded their tribal membership.

The order applies only to appeals made by the descendants, commonly known as freedmen, in tribal court, and not to ongoing appeals being made in federal court in Washington, D.C. ...

But Jon Velie, the attorney for the freedmen in the federal case, called the tribal court’s action “a temporary fix” and said the tribe was reacting to recent filings by the freedmen in the federal case. In that case on Monday, U.S. District Judge Henry H. Kennedy Jr. denied a motion by the tribe to dismiss the case or move jurisdiction of it to an Oklahoma federal court.

Young said the order by Cherokee District Court Judge John Cripps means the freedmen will be able to vote in the tribe’s June 23 election, in which current Chief Chad Smith is running for another term. The Tahlequah-based Cherokee Nation is the largest American Indian tribe in the United States, with about 250,000 members. -- Tribe to restore freedmen

Posted by Ed at 7:32 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Muskogee Phoenix reports: A recent vote by the Cherokee Nation to revoke the membership of descendants of freed slaves might not have been legal, according to the leader of the federal Bureau of Indian Affairs.

The Tahlequah-based tribe disagrees with that assessment, however, and a tribal spokesman predicted that Congress will reject an effort by one of its members to stop the tribe from receiving federal funds, the Tulsa World reported from its Washington bureau.

The two sides are debating the tribe’s right to enforce a 2003 tribal constitutional amendment and its March 3 vote to remove the descendants of the tribe’s freed slaves, known as freedmen, from tribal rolls.

Carl Artman, who heads the BIA, told U.S. Rep. Diane Watson, D-Calif., in a letter that the U.S. Interior Secretary must approve the 2003 amendment before it can take legal effect. The letter also said the BIA has taken no action on the March vote. -- MuskogeePhoenix.com, Muskogee, OK - Cherokees, Feds at odds over vote

Posted by Ed at 8:02 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Denver Channel.com reports: A House committee on Tuesday struck a provision that would have allowed felons on parole to vote after opponents said it was unconstitutional.

The amendment, introduced by Sen. Peter Groff, D-Denver, at the request of the American Civil Liberties Union, would have given felons on parole the right to vote.

The House Committee on State, Veterans, & Military Affairs voted to strike the amendment to a measure (Senate Bill 83), which Attorney General John Suthers had previously described as unconstitutional. -- Lawmakers Strike Plan To Allow Felons On Parole To Vote - News Story - KMGH Denver

Posted by Ed at 7:44 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

AP reports: A black congresswoman is seeking to cut off funding for the Cherokee Nation after the tribe's recent vote to revoke citizenship of slave descendants.

Rep. Diane Watson, D-Calif., said the Bush administration has dragged its feet after the March 3 tribal referendum, which removed an estimated 2,800 black slave descendants from tribal rolls.

The tribe insists that the vote last month had nothing to do with race. But Watson and about two dozen members of the Congressional Black Caucus wrote to the Interior Department last month expressing outrage over the vote and asking how the government could intervene.

The Interior Department responded in a letter to the caucus last week saying that it was concerned about the vote and was still reviewing its legality.

In an interview Wednesday with The Associated Press, Watson said the agency doesn't seem willing to address the issue and is turning a blind eye to discrimination. She said she is drafting legislation, which she plans to introduce next week, to cut off the Cherokee Nation's federal funding. -- SanLuisObispo.com | 04/19/2007 | SoCal lawmaker eyes cutting Cherokee funding over ex-slave vote

Posted by Ed at 7:03 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Muskogeee Phoenix reports: Cherokee Nation councilors voted Monday to give the administration an additional $520,000 to fight the freedmen case in federal court.

A preliminary non-binding vote came in a meeting of the Executive and Finance Committee with all but three of the 17 councilors present. A full council vote will be taken in the regular council meeting in May as councilors found out the legal fund still has $360,000. The extra money will not be needed this month.

Several councilors were against funding the nation’s fight against the freedmen, saying they were using tribal funds to kick out tribal citizens.

Council attorney Todd Hembree explained the suit was about more than the freedmen — it was about tribal sovereignty because of rulings by the federal judge in the case. -- Cherokees OK money to fight case

Is there a suit already pending? I have not been able to find it mentioned in the press or in the Pacer system in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

Posted by Ed at 7:17 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Farhad Manjoo asks and answers the question at Salon.com: During his campaign for the Florida governorship last fall, Charlie Crist frequently expressed deep moral opposition to the state's practice of permanently prohibiting convicted felons from exercising their right to vote. But Crist is a Republican, and his promise to fix Florida's notorious felon-voting ban sometimes sounded like nothing more than campaign puffery. Felon disenfranchisement has long given Republicans a considerable boost at the polls in Florida; if the state's ex-cons had been allowed to vote in 2000, George W. Bush would now be the commissioner of baseball. Was Charlie Crist really going to kill this political golden goose?

On Thursday, he did just that. Crist, who became governor after handily defeating Democrat Jim Davis in November, ushered in a proposal that will quickly restore the voting rights of most of Florida's felons as soon as they are released from prison. The plan looks sure to alter the political landscape in the nation's most populous -- and electoral-vote-rich -- swing state. -- What was Charlie Crist thinking? | Salon.com

Posted by Ed at 2:01 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

A press release from the Governor of Florida: Governor Charlie Crist today during a special meeting of the Florida Board of Executive Clemency introduced a change to the Rules of Executive Clemency that will provide for the restoration of the civil rights for certain ex-offenders. The rule was approved by a 3-1 majority of the clemency board, which consists of the Governor and the Florida Cabinet. Attorney General Bill McCollum voted against the measure.

“If we believe people have paid their debt to society, then that debt should be considered paid in full, and their civil rights should in fact be restored,” said Governor Crist. “By granting ex-offenders the opportunity to participate in the democratic process, we restore their ability to be gainfully employed, as well as their dignity.”

Under the rule, the civil rights of ex-offenders who have committed less severe crimes, and meet the following requirements, would qualify for approval without a hearing. -- Florida Governor Charlie Crist | Governor Crist Announces Clemency Board’s Vote to Restore Civil Rights

Posted by Ed at 2:52 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Steve Rankin emails (since my Comments function is messed up): “[T]he lawsuit seeks to restrict primary voting only to people who plan to support the party’s nominee in a general election.”

This makes it sound like the court can issue an order saying who can and who cannot vote in party primaries-- which it cannot.

Mississippi law forces each party to allow any voter to take part in its primaries. The Democrats are asking the court to declare this law unconstitutional. If the law is ultimately struck down, each party will then be free to determine who votes in its primaries.

“The courts have ruled that people cannot vote in a Democratic primary and then turn around and vote in [the] Republican runoff or vice versa.”

The courts have ruled no such thing. This is up to the legislature. Take Alabama, for example. Since state law does not forbid it, Alabama Republicans invite people who vote in the Democratic (first) primary to cross over and vote in the Republican runoff (or second) primary.

This Associated Press article had Jack Elliott Jr.'s byline on it.

The burning question: Why don’t AP writers give their addresses, so their readers can contact them?

Posted by Ed at 2:19 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

AP reports: Attorneys for plaintiffs wanting to keep non-Democrats from voting in Democratic Party primaries have asked a federal judge to let a trial go on, as scheduled.

There is disagreement within the Democratic Party about the lawsuit, which seeks to restrict primary voting only to people who plan to support the party’s nominee in a general election.

U.S. District Judge W. Allen Pepper has set the case for trial July 30 in Greenville.

The attorney general’s office, on behalf of the three-member State Board of Election Commissioners, asked Pepper in January to dismiss the lawsuit. On March 12, the Democratic Party asked Pepper to deny the state’s request.

Pepper has given the attorney general until April 6 to file a final brief supporting its motion to throw out the lawsuit. -- The Picayune Item - Miss. Democrats ask federal judge to allow lawsuit to go to trial

Posted by Ed at 7:47 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

AP reports: Attorneys for plaintiffs wanting to keep non-Democrats from voting in Democratic Party primaries have asked a federal judge to let a trial go on, as scheduled.

There is disagreement within the Democratic Party about the lawsuit, which seeks to restrict primary voting only to people who plan to support the party’s nominee in a general election.

U.S. District Judge W. Allen Pepper has set the case for trial July 30 in Greenville.

The attorney general’s office, on behalf of the three-member State Board of Election Commissioners, asked Pepper in January to dismiss the lawsuit. On March 12, the Democratic Party asked Pepper to deny the state’s request.

Pepper has given the attorney general until April 6 to file a final brief supporting its motion to throw out the lawsuit. -- The Picayune Item - Miss. Democrats ask federal judge to allow lawsuit to go to trial

Posted by Ed at 7:55 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The New York Times reports: Hinting that a remarkable turnaround in state policy was near, Gov. Charlie Crist said Monday that he hoped to persuade members of the Florida cabinet this week to end the practice of stripping convicted felons of their right to vote. ...

Felons in Florida who have served their prison and probation time can apply to have their voting rights reinstated, but the process can be time consuming and complex. Only a few hundred have their rights restored each year in Florida, where the American Civil Liberties Union says 950,000 remain disenfranchised.

Mr. Crist, a Republican, said that to win the support of some cabinet members, he might require former felons to pay whatever restitution they owe to victims before regaining their rights. Some civil rights groups, including the A.C.L.U., oppose such a compromise, but Mr. Crist said he had little choice. ...

Only a constitutional amendment could formally end the ban, but under state law, the governor and cabinet — who also make up the state clemency board — could grant blanket clemency to everyone who completes their sentence. Mr. Crist needs two of the three cabinet members to sign off on the plan. -- Florida Governor Is Hoping to Restore Felon Voting Rights - New York Times

Posted by Ed at 7:38 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Yale Daily News reports: Seventeen-year-olds who will turn 18 before Election Day may soon be allowed to vote in state primaries, pending the ratification of an amendment to Connecticut’s constitution.

Backed by Secretary of State Susan Bysiewicz and State Rep. James Spallone, the bill, if passed, would make Connecticut the 10th state to enact such a constitutional revision. Bysiewicz said the bill — which was unanimously approved by the Government Administrations and Elections committee — is designed to encourage youth participation in the political process and to increase the amount of attention paid to youth issues.

Spallone said the proposal addresses the need to bolster voting among young people — the age group that consistently has the lowest turn-out — in order to encourage them to assume a more active role in politics. ...

Currently, 17-year-olds are not able to vote in primary elections even if they will be eligible to vote before the associated general election. The amendment would not lower the overall voting age to 17. -- Yale Daily News - 17-year-olds could vote in primaries

Posted by Ed at 7:47 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

BBC News reports: A judge has refused to free a prisoner who wanted to register to vote in the Scottish Parliament elections.

However Donald Birrell - who complained that his human rights had been breached - may still be able to win damages.

Birrell was let out on licence in May last year but is now back in jail after the licence was revoked last month. ...

Under current laws - the 1983 Representation of the People Act - a ban on voting is imposed on all prisoners being held under a sentence.

Remand prisoners and those freed on licence are allowed to cast their vote. -- BBC NEWS | UK | Scotland | Judge denies inmate's voting bid

Posted by Ed at 7:26 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Washington Post reports: Mayor Adrian M. Fenty declared in his first State of the District address yesterday that he is moving fast to make Washington a better place to live, and urged residents to join him for a people's march on Capitol Hill to push for D.C. voting rights.

"The United States government has brought democracy to Baghdad before bringing it home to the District," Fenty told hundreds of senior citizens at Congress Heights Senior Wellness Center in Ward 8. "We are the only capital of a democracy in the world that has no vote in the national legislature." ...

Fenty's call came a day after advisers to President Bush said they would recommend that he veto a bill that would give the city a full vote in the House of Representatives. The D.C. vote bill, which would add two seats to the 435-member House, one for the heavily Democratic District and the other to Republican-leaning Utah, is expected to reach the House floor today.

After his address, Fenty said he has left messages for White House Chief of Staff Joshua B. Bolten to talk with him about the bill. -- Fenty Says He and City Are on the Move - washingtonpost.com

Posted by Ed at 5:18 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Nation (Nairobi) reports: Kenyans living abroad want Parliament to enact a law to allow dual citizenship so they can register to vote.

Through a lobby group, the Kenya Movement for Democracy and Justice (KMDJ), they say they want the Government and the Opposition to pass such a law because it was among the non-contentious issues contained in the rejected draft constitution.

There was fear the matter might not be given its due recognition now that it has been politicised by leaders every time they met Kenyans outside, KMDJ United Kingdom chapter chairman Ng'ethe wa Mbiyu said

They want Parliament to take up the matter now that the Electoral Commission of Kenya (ECK) had made it clear they had no powers to amend the law to allow dual citizenship as well as voting outside Kenya. -- allAfrica.com: Kenya: Kenyans in Diaspora Want Right to Vote (Page 1 of 1)

Posted by Ed at 7:57 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Tulsa World reports: Cherokee Nation voters overwhelmingly chose to remove freedmen from their tribal rolls in a special election Saturday.

Complete results late Saturday show 77 percent of the voters supported the proposed amendment to the Cherokee Constitution. About 8,700 votes were cast in the tribe's 14-county district.

The question put to voters proposed a constitutional amendment to require that only descendants of "by blood" tribal members on the 1906 Dawes Rolls would remain in the tribe, excluding about 2,770 freedmen descendants, who were affirmed by the tribe's high court as tribal citizens in March 2006. ..

The amendment also removes non-Indian descendants of "intermarried whites," according to the ballot wording.

Members of the Shawnee and Delaware by blood rolls, who also are Cherokee Nation citizens, will remain on the rolls.

The amendment excludes from Cherokee tribal rolls the descendants of freed Cherokee slaves categorized as freedmen.

Freedmen often intermarried with the tribe and lived within the
Cherokee Nation boundaries. -- tulsaworld.com: News

Posted by Ed at 11:58 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Washington Post reports: The 250,000-member Cherokee Nation will vote in a special election today whether to override a 141-year-old treaty and change the tribal constitution to bar "freedmen," the descendants of former tribal slaves, from being members of the sovereign nation.

"It's a basic, inherent right to determine our own citizenry. We paid very dearly for those rights," Cherokee Principal Chief Chad Smith said in an interview last month in Oklahoma City.

But the Cherokee freedmen see the vote as less about self-determination than about discrimination and historical blinders. They see in the referendum hints of racism and a desire by some Cherokees to deny the tribe's slave-owning past. ...

People on both sides of the issue say the fight is also about tribal politics -- the freedmen at times have been at odds with the tribal leadership -- and about money.

Advocates of expelling the freedmen call it a matter of safeguarding tribal resources, which include a $350 million annual budget from federal and tribal revenue, and Cherokees' share of a gambling industry that, for U.S. tribes overall, takes in $22 billion a year. The grass-roots campaign for expulsion has given heavy play to warnings that keeping freedmen in the Cherokee Nation could encourage thousands more to sign up for a slice of the tribal pie. -- Cherokee Nation To Vote on Expelling Slaves' Descendants - washingtonpost.com

Posted by Ed at 3:21 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Boston Globe reports: By a 20-4 vote, Newton aldermen approved allowing residents who are not US citizens the right to vote in local elections.

Ted Hess-Mahan , alderman at large from Ward 3 , sponsored the measure, saying it is only fair that residents who pay taxes, send their kids to school, and own property in Newton should also be able to vote on measures that affect them. The overwhelming vote contrasts with 2005, when Hess-Mahan couldn't drum up support for a similar proposal. -- Newton aldermen OK vote for noncitizens - The Boston Globe

Posted by Ed at 8:24 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Washington Post reports: It can't be easy being in Congress without a vote, but the District's delegate, Eleanor Holmes Norton, has stuck it out for 16 long years, never truly a part of the club but always relentlessly knocking on the door seeking admittance.

Now, Norton is sure, success is in her sights. With Democratic leaders pledging to get it done and ample Republican support, the bill giving both the District of Columbia and Utah an additional voting seat is cruising along. ...

The District's quest for voting rights and statehood has taken many roads for decades. Twenty years ago, legal experts believed only a constitutional amendment could give the city voting rights. But ultimately, only 16 of the 38 states needed voted to ratify the amendment. Most contemporary legal thinking, including an endorsement by the American Bar Association last year, declares the bill constitutionally sound.

Norton's bill, co-sponsored by Rep. Thomas M. Davis III (R-Va.), must clear two committees before it is brought for a floor vote. Norton is hoping that will happen in March. Brendan Daly, a spokesman for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), said Pelosi is committed to finalizing the bill's language, moving it through committees and having a floor vote as soon as possible. -- Lois Romano - For Norton and the City, the Wait May Be Over - washingtonpost.com

Posted by Ed at 11:10 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Marc Fisher writes in the Washington Post: Just as D.C. Mayor Adrian Fenty cheered voting rights advocates with a new effort to lobby Congress for the right that all other Americans take for granted, and just as congressional Democrats were gearing up to show that they intend to be more aggressive on D.C. voting rights than the Republican leadership had been, along comes the Congressional Research Service with a whole new barrier.

The non-partisan Research Service concluded that giving D.C. residents a full, voting seat in the House of Representatives is probably unconstitutional. Suddenly, the air seemed to escape from the voting rights balloon.

Now, D.C. voting rights advocates are scrambling to reassert Congress's authority to create a House seat for the District. On the theory that the Democrats have more to gain from a D.C. seat than the Republicans, the new lobbying effort is aimed at persuading Republicans that this is not only the right thing to do, but a legally well-founded path as well. And who better to make that case than two solid citizens of the right, conservative legal scholars Kenneth Starr, the former Clinton impeachment case special prosecutor, and Viet Dinh, the Georgetown law professor and former Justice Department official.

Starr notes that the Constitution is silent on the matter of whether D.C. residents may vote. In the Founders' era, there was no expectation that people would live in the capital, which was then little more than an idea surrounded by Maryland and Virginia. But Starr says despite that silence, Congress has the authority to adapt to the fact that a full-fledged city grew up here; the Constitution expressly says that "The Congress shall have power ... to exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever" over the District of Columbia. -- The Conservative Case for D.C. Voting Rights - Raw Fisher

Posted by Ed at 8:17 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Washington Post reports: Advocates seeking to expand the voting rights of convicted felons in Maryland are stepping up their efforts this year, hoping that the election of Gov. Martin O'Malley will help move bills that stalled in past years.

Leaders from the 2nd Episcopal District of the African Methodist Episcopal Church met with O'Malley (D) yesterday morning to encourage him to support legislation that, in varying degrees, would restore the voting rights of former offenders.

In Maryland, a first-time offender is able to vote after completing a sentence, including any probation or parole. People convicted of two or more felonies must wait three years before they can vote.

A House bill would allow first-time offenders to vote after they are released from prison. A Senate bill would remove the waiting period for second-time offenders. -- Advocates Urge O'Malley to Back Restored Rights - washingtonpost.com

Posted by Ed at 8:35 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Scott Moss writes on Concurring Opinions about two news stories: That is: if we trust felons (at least some of them) enough to let them carry guns and have access to our military in the middle of a war, I can't see an argument that there's any valid reason to prevent them from voting.

It always has been striking how courts strain to avoid invalidating felon disenfranchisement laws. Though I am not a voting rights expert, to my limited review of the case law, the holdings declaring such laws permissible under the Voting Rights Act seem particularly weak; the Act bans practices that have a disparate impact by race (as disenfranchisement laws do), and some courts seem to have avoided finding a violation by reasoning, "Congress didn't intend for its ban on racial disparate impacts to invalidate felon disenfranchisement laws" (I'm paraphrasing). The best response I can give is what Justice Scalia wrote in holding same-sex sexual harassment actionable under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, a statute that clearly was intended as a ban on race (and to a lesser extent sex) discrimination in hiring by a Congress that surely never considered same-sex issues in employment:

[M]ale-on-male sexual harassment in the workplace was assuredly not the principal evil Congress was concerned with when it enacted Title VII. But statutory prohibitions often go beyond the principal evil to cover reasonably comparable evils, and it is ultimately the provisions of our laws rather than the principal concerns of our legislators by which we are governed. (emphasis added)

Posted by Ed at 8:28 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Lexington Herald-Leader reports: The power of governors to issue pardons would be limited, and certain felons could have their voting rights restored, under constitutional amendments approved Tuesday by a legislative committee.

The House Elections, Constitutional Amendments and Intergovernmental Affairs Committee voted 8-3 for a measure to prohibit Kentucky governors from pardoning themselves and pardoning others unless they had been formally charged or convicted of a crime.

House Bill 3, sponsored by Reps. Darryl Owens, D-Louisville, and Rob Wilkey, D-Scottsville, would prohibit blanket pardons of people who had not been charged with crimes, and would require those seeking pardons to apply for the reprieves. ...

The committee also approved HB 70, which calls for a constitutional amendment that would automatically restore voting rights to felons after they complete their sentences. It would not apply to murderers or sex offenders.

Under Kentucky's constitution, felons must appeal to the governor to ask for the reinstatement of their rights to vote, hold office or bear arms. The legislation, sponsored by Rep. Jesse Crenshaw, D-Lexington, would bypass the governor's office when it comes to restoring most felons' voting rights. -- Lexington Herald-Leader | 02/13/2007 | Bills would change constitutional rules for pardons, felon voting rights

Posted by Ed at 3:08 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

AP reports: Lawyers arguing a challenge to Missouri election law before a federal appeals court panel here disagreed yesterday whether the state denies voting rights to some mentally ill people.

The lawyer for a mentally ill man in Kansas City said the Missouri Constitution and state law deny voting rights to Missourians assigned a guardian because of "mental incapacity."

Anti-discrimination law expert Samuel Bagenstos conceded that some counties have ordered individual assessments of those under guardianship to determine their competence to vote. But, he said, they have no authority and are under no obligation to do so.

Bagenstos wants the court to declare what he calls the voting ban unconstitutional and in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Ultimately, he said, it’s up to the General Assembly to reshape the law to allow for mentally ill people under guardianship to be assessed individually for voting competence.

A lawyer for the state, meanwhile, maintains Missouri does provide for individual assessments to determine whether a mentally incapacitated person is nonetheless competent to vote. -- Court considers voting rights for mentally ill

Posted by Ed at 3:03 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

AP reports: About one out of every 14 voting-age Alabamians can't vote because of felony convictions. Restoring their voting rights has created confusion in county courthouses and is about to create a battle in the Legislature.

Attorney General Troy King said he plans to propose a constitutional amendment that would return to Alabama's old system, requiring all felons to apply to the state parole board to get their voting rights restored after finishing their punishment. His constitutional amendment would apply to future felons, not those already in the system.

"It clarifies the law," King said. "It makes it easier for election officials to do their jobs. And it preserves the integrity of our system."

It also creates more work for the state parole board, which is already struggling under a heavy load of probation and parole cases.

"It would be a nightmare," Sarah Still, manager of the board's pardons division, said Friday. -- montgomeryadvertiser.com :: Attorney general wants felon voting change

Posted by Ed at 8:02 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Bowdoin Orient reports: A lawmaker has introduced a bill in the Maine House of Representatives that would take away voting rights for college students from out-of-state.

The legislature's Legal and Veterans Affairs Committee heard testimony on the bill Wednesday and will hold a vote on February 7.

The sponsor of the bill, Representative Gary Knight, R-Livermore Falls, said that sometimes college students commit voter fraud by voting both at college and at home, according to a report in the Kennebec Journal. Other supporters of the bill say that students living in dormitories in Maine colleges just aren't residents. ...

In an e-mail to the Orient, Don Cookson, communications director at the Department of the Secretary of State, confirmed that in the last five years there have been no cases of voter fraud in the entire state. -- Bill would limit voting rights for non-Mainers

Posted by Ed at 7:16 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The DCist blog reports: Last year ended on a bit of a sour note for District voting rights, but activists aren't letting a little bad news stop them.

After being stymied by Republican leaders in the closing weeks of the 109th Congress, Rep. Tom Davis (R-Va.) and D.C. Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton re-introduced legislation on January 9 to grant the District one voting seat in the House of Representatives. The legislation, known as the Fair and Equal House Voting Rights Act, is currently before the House Judiciary Committee, and voting rights activists hope to have it before the full House in February. In a press briefing last week on the matter, D.C. Vote Executive Director Ilir Zherka recognized that the legislation's re-introduction represented a "second chance to finish this marathon," also admitting, "we're in the last few miles...[they're] the most difficult." -- DCist: Voting Rights Bill Re-Introduced; Faces Challenges

Posted by Ed at 8:08 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

AP reports: On this date: ... In 1915, the U.S. House of Representatives rejected a proposal to give women the right to vote.

In 1932, Hattie W. Caraway became the first woman elected to the U.S. Senate. -- AP Wire | 01/12/2007 | Today in history - Jan. 12

Posted by Ed at 7:26 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Tampa Tribune reports: An unlikely lawmaker is taking the lead to change Florida law to restore voting rights to convicted felons.

Orlando state Sen. Gary Siplin, a convicted felon himself, has sponsored Senate Bill 466, which automatically restores voting rights a year after the felon's sentence is completed.

Florida is among three states that don't automatically restore voting rights. The issue gained steam during the 2006 governor's race with both Gov.-elect Charlie Crist and Democrat Jim Davis advocating changing it.

An Orlando jury convicted Siplin in August of third-degree grand theft for having his legislative staff members work on his 2004 Senate re-election campaign on state time. He was sentenced to three years of probation and community service and continues to serve in the Legislature while appealing his conviction. -- Lawmaker: Give Felons Voting Rights

Posted by Ed at 7:51 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Oroville Mercury-Register reports: Approximately 30 demonstrators picketed on Saturday outside the Southside Community Center on Lower Wyandotte Road as Enterprise Rancheria conducted a Disenrollment Appeals Hearing inside. The hearing was conducted for appellants Carolyn Porteous and Darlene Taylor the final two of the 72 total tribal members disenrolled from Enterprise Rancheria.

Demonstrators came to show support for Porteous and Taylor. Both women were former tribal members of the Enterprise Rancheria and were disenrolled in May of 2004, after the spoke against the disenrollment of 70 tribal members, according to former Enterprise Rancheria Vice Chairman Robert Edwards.

"Carolyn and Darlene were disenrolled when they spoke out on behalf of the 70 members disenrolled from Enterprise Rancheria the previous November of 2003," Edwards said. "This is just another example of the intimidation tactics exercised by Enterprise Rancheria's tribal leaders and how freedom of speech is expressly prohibited or with consequences."

Both Carolyn and Darlene were very vocal in their criticism of tribal government when they denied the suspended 70 members their right to vote in the Recall Election scheduled for September of 2003, Edwards said. During that same time period in 2003, Carolyn Porteous confronted the responsible tribal officials when they changed the tribal constitution in a manner not consistent with tribal law in order to ultimately affect the outcome of the vote at the Disenrollment Hearing held in November of 2003, Edwards said. ...

Enterprise Tribal chairwoman Glenda Nelson has said they disenrolled the tribal members to keep the tribe unified, as the divisiveness was splitting the tribe. -- Oroville Mercury Register - Appellants disenrolled for speaking out

Posted by Ed at 8:03 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Bowling Green Daily News reports: Four separate bills have been filed designed to provide convicted felons with a way to reclaim their voting rights.

The bills handle this process in several ways; one suggests that immediately upon completion of their sentence rights could be restored. Another suggests rights be renewed after they've finished parole. Both would require constitutional amendments. A third, filed by Rep. Rob Wilkey, D-Scottsville, allows for the record to be expunged of one or a series of class D felonies. This, if passed, would restore that person's voting rights and their right to own a firearm.

Wilkey said his is probably the most conservative of all the bills. It only applies to people convicted of nonviolent and nonsexual offenses. ...

A person convicted of a felony must wait five years after the adjudication of their offense and go before a judge to have the record expunged, which allows them the right to vote and to carry a gun, he said. -- Bowling Green, KY, Kentucky Daily News

Posted by Ed at 6:36 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The New York Times reports: The State of Utah and the District of Columbia are perhaps the oddest imaginable political allies in a nation of polarized partisan loyalties, alike in few things other than bankable predictability: Washington Democratic, Utah Republican.

But they share outrage that each does not have more influence in Congress, and Utah took a big step toward a marriage of convenience Monday when legislators here approved a plan that would give the state a fourth Congressional seat before the next census and Washington its first voting representation ever.

The plan for the District and Utah, a state denied a fourth seat after the 2000 census because the government did not count thousands of residents who were away serving as missionaries for the Mormon Church, faces big hurdles.

Still, the gulf of political difference between the two is the very glue that offers both of them some hope Congress will give its required approval: one of the newly created seats would almost certainly be Democratic, the other Republican, with no net change in the balance of power. -- Utah, Using Olive Branch, Tries to Add Seat in House - New York Times

Posted by Ed at 7:47 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Louisville Courier-Journal reports: Felons would have their voting rights restored automatically after finishing their sentences under a constitutional amendment that lawmakers and activists proposed yesterday.

Activists backed their proposal with a new poll showing that 56 percent of Kentuckians support such a change.

The state constitution imposes a lifetime voting ban on felons; only the governor can reverse it. Gov. Ernie Fletcher changed the process by requiring applicants to write a statement and provide three references. ...

In fiscal year 2003, before Fletcher took office, voting rights were restored to 1,231 felons, according to the coalition, which said the numbers came from the Department of Corrections and the secretary of state.

In fiscal year 2006, that number fell to 227, the coalition said. -- Voting rights for felons proposed

Posted by Ed at 7:16 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

NPR : Voting Problems Crop Up Ahead of Elections
NPR's Morning Edition reports: Signs of possible voting trouble are popping up ahead of midterm elections. The reports range from hackers getting into an official registration database to ballots being printed incorrectly. Pam Fessler reports.

Note: Audio for this story will be available at approx. 10:00 a.m. ET.

Posted by Ed at 7:45 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Joell Palmer, the plaintiff in Palmer v. Marion County posts his entire complaint on a new blog. It begins: 1. Introduction: This is an action to enjoin a threat to the integrity of the election process. Time is of the essence. Defendants are attempting to engage in voter fraud, by preventing voters without a voting license from voting. The result will be that the winners of the upcoming elections cannot be determined, because an unknown number of eligible voters will be prevented from voting. Without duly elected government officials, the government will lack legitimacy. The open door law claim provides a basis for statutory entitlement to an accelerated docket. A motion for a TRO and preliminary injunction is filed herewith, to prevent irreparable harm. -- palmer v marion county

Thanks to the Arbitrary Aardvark for the tip.

Posted by Ed at 7:44 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Poughkeepsie Journal reports: A new statewide database of registered voters contains as many as 77,000 dead people on its rolls, and as many as 2,600 of them have cast votes from the grave, according to a Poughkeepsie Journal computer-assisted analysis.

The Journal's analysis of New York's 3-month-old database is the first to determine the potential for errors and fraud in voting. It matched names, dates of birth and ZIP codes in the state's database of 11.7 million voter registration records against the same information in the Social Security Administration's "Death Master File." That database has 77 million records of deaths dating back to 1937. ...

Among the Journal's findings:

- There were dead people on the voter rolls in all of New York's 62 counties and people in as many as 45 counties who had votes recorded after they had died.

- One Bronx address was listed as the home for as many as 191 registered voters who had died. The address is 5901 Palisade Ave., in Riverdale, site of the Hebrew Home for the Aged.

- Democrats who cast votes after they died outnumbered Republicans by more than 4 to 1. The reason: Most of them came from Democrat-dominated New York City, where the higher population produced more matches. -- Dead voters continue to cast ballots in New York

Posted by Ed at 6:41 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Alabama Supreme Court has denied a stay (sought by the Secretary of State) in Gooden v. Worley, in which the plaintiffs prevailed in the trial court and obtained an order requiring boards of registrars to follow the state constitution.

The Constitution of Alabama provides that those convicted of felonies "involving moral turpitude" are not allowed to register to vote. The plaintiffs alleged and proved that registrars were routinely denying all persons convicted of any felony the right to register.

The trial court (Circuit Judge Robert S. Vance, Jr.) had granted relief to the plaintiffs, including a requirement that registrars obey the Constitution. For some reason, the State sought a stay of this common-sense requirement.

Ryan Haygood of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund and I represent the plaintiffs in this case.

Update:
The Birmingham News reports: The Alabama Supreme Court has cleared the way for people who have been convicted of felonies such as DUI, attempted burglary and liquor law violations to register to vote.

In a 5-4 decision released Thursday, the court denied the state of Alabama's request to stay a portion of Jefferson County Judge Robert Vance's August ruling that allowed all felons to vote. The portion required the Secretary of State and Jefferson County's registrar to stop refusing voter registration to people who have been convicted of crimes that do not involve moral turpitude.

Vance had ruled that all voter registrars in Alabama counties must allow all felons to register to vote until the State Legislature passes a law that defines crimes of moral turpitude. Vance had said state law does not define such crimes, and the state constitution holds that those guilty of crimes of moral turpitude forfeit the right to vote. -- Court clears some felons to vote

Posted by Ed at 1:15 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

AP reports: During 40 long, hard years of living what Zeddie Mauldin calls "the street life," voting ranked low on a to-do list that was topped with getting his next fix from a myriad of drugs, preferably heroin.

He racked up four stints in prison and several judgments during those 40 years, but, he says, it was the latest conviction -- for stealing a car -- that took him off drugs and took him to God. Unfortunately, it also took away his right to vote.

"I've got a nice car, nice apartment, good job, I go to Atlanta to visit my daughter even if it's ... just for lunch," says Mauldin, a 64-year-old catering manager who lives in Birmingham. "These are the types of things that I'm doing in my life now that I get high off of. If I can be able to vote, I feel like I have really, totally got my life back together."

According to an analysis released Thursday by two felon rights advocacy groups, Mauldin is just one of an estimated 250,046 Alabamians who have been barred from voting because of felony convictions.

That's one of every 14 Alabama voting-age adults, which is three times the national average and the third highest rate of disenfranchisement in the country, according to the report by The Alabama Alliance to Restore the Vote and the Washington, D.C.-based The Sentencing Project. -- montgomeryadvertiser.com :: Analysis: Alabama among top states in felon disenfranchisement

Posted by Ed at 6:55 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Katharine Mieszkowski writes on Salon.com: When Koren Carbuccia went to prison for the second time, her son, Vaskan, was just 3 months old. Being incarcerated during the earliest years of his life changed hers. She wanted nothing more than to be home with him. ...

Carbuccia won an early release in February 2005. Today, at 27, she is a student at Community College of Rhode Island, studying substance abuse counseling, and working toward a master's degree. While going to school and caring for her son, she also works 20 hours a week doing data entry at the Family Life Center in Providence, which provides assistance for ex-offenders and their families. Recently, she took Vaskan, now almost 5, to his first day of preschool. "I want to do the right thing," says Carbuccia, who describes herself as a PTA mom. "I want to be responsible and raise my child. "

But there's one way Carbuccia isn't like other moms, and as the law in Rhode Island now stands, won't be until 2017. Only then, when she's completed both parole and probation, will she be allowed to vote. Until she's 38 years old, she'll be a second-class citizen, working, parenting, studying, paying taxes, but unable to cast a ballot. In a state of just 1 million, she's one of more than 15,000 disenfranchised voters because of prior felonies.

Across the U.S., nearly 4 million people with felony convictions, who are out of prison, have no say in their own government, and won't be going to the polls on Nov. 7. Their lost votes could make a decisive difference in close Senate and House races this fall, especially in Florida, Kentucky and Virginia, where, unlike most states, felons, even after serving their time, never regain the right to vote. Among the races that could be affected are Virginia Sen. George Allen's attempt to retain his Senate seat, despite his recently exposed history of using racial slurs, and the House race for Kentucky District 3, where polls now show Republican Anne Northup essentially tied in her attempts to keep her seat from challenger Democrat John Yarmuth.

Sociologists who have long studied the disenfranchisement of felons say that the lost votes amount to a built-in advantage for Republicans, seen most famously in the 2000 presidential race in Florida, in which Al Gore would have likely beat George W. Bush had ex-felons been allowed to vote. -- Barred from voting | Salon News

Posted by Ed at 9:32 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Miami Herald reports: Regardless of who becomes governor of Florida in three weeks, one thing now appears certain: The 136-year-old rule that keeps most felons from being able to vote after they have completed their sentences will be scrapped.

Republican Charlie Crist has switched his position and joined Democratic opponent Jim Davis in favoring restoring the civil rights of all felons automatically after they have served their time. Until recently, Crist opposed automatic restoration.

''It all comes down to one fundamental question: Do you believe that an individual has paid his debt to society?'' Crist said Tuesday in an interview with The Miami Herald editorial board. ``If they've really paid their debt to society, then why not restore their right to vote?'' -- MiamiHerald.com | 10/18/2006 | Voting ban for felons could end with next governor

Posted by Ed at 7:44 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Providence Journal reports: A civil rights activist who worked with the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. exhorted community leaders yesterday to urge high voter turnout next month for Ballot Question 2, which would restore voting rights to convicted felons.

“If Martin Luther King Jr. were alive today, he would be right here standing with me, saying to you what I am saying, and that is that there’s nothing more important than to involve all of our people in the arena of public policy. They call it politics,” the Rev. Walter E. Fauntroy said, according to an audio recording of his speech provided by one of the participants in a rally yesterday in support of restoring voting rights.

Besides having worked with King, Fauntroy represented the District of Columbia in the House of Representatives and was a founder of the Congressional Black Caucus.

The Rhode Island Constitution bars felons from voting until they have completed their entire sentence, including probation. Question 2 would amend the Constitution to allow felons to vote when they are released from prison, even if their entire sentence has not expired. -- Rhode Island news | projo.com | The Providence Journal | Local News

Posted by Ed at 8:20 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

AP reports: Some say there are two problems with Mississippi's system that deals with voting rights of convicted felons.

First is a provision in the Mississippi Constitution that sets forth the crimes that result in a loss of voting rights. The second is the process of restoring those rights to ex-convicts.

The American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit earlier this month challenging Mississippi's denial of voting rights to ex-convicts. The ACLU specifically is challenging a 2004 opinion from Attorney General Jim Hood that adds 11 more crimes to the 10 that appear in the constitution as grounds for denying restoration of voting rights.

The ACLU argues that any changes should have been through legislative action. Hood contends that his opinion was based on a ruling by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

Among the additional crimes in Hood's opinion are felony bad check, timber larceny and carjacking. The constitution lists crimes that include murder, rape and embezzlement. -- Restoring suffrage to felons won't be approved soon - The Clarion-Ledger

Posted by Ed at 8:16 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Sasha Abramsky writes on Democracy Dispatches: Late this summer Judge Robert Vance, Jr., of the Circuit Court of Jefferson County, issued a decree that the blanket disenfranchisement of felons in Alabama violated the state's constitution. A few weeks later, at the urging of the state's attorney general, Vance agreed to put most of his order on hold until after the November elections. The delay would, he said, give the state's Supreme Court a chance to weigh in on the question.

Vance's initial ruling was a brave one and ought to have been applauded by all who care about voting rights in America. Yet, even before political pressure led to his backtracking, Vance's decision was founded almost on a technicality, rather than on a principled objection to disenfranchisement per se . Let me explain.

Because election law is generally left up to individual states, America has a crazy-quilt system of laws when it comes to felons and voting rights. In Maine and Vermont, felons can vote even while they're in prison. In Utah they cannot vote while in prison but their political rights are restored the moment they exit the prison gates at the end of their sentences. Elsewhere parolees cannot vote. Some states impose additional waiting periods at the backend of a person's sentence before they can vote, and still other states have a system of "permanent disenfranchisement" in place, whereby one-time felons have to go through a variety of difficult bureaucratic processes in order to apply to have their voting rights restored. If they don't make this effort, they remain voteless. Alabama, like many of its southern neighbors, is in the latter category.

Yet, to make matters still more confusing, while a state like Florida simply disenfranchises all ex-felons until such time as they can convince the governor and his staff that they are worthy of re-enfranchisement, Alabama's disenfranchisement laws rest on Jim Crow-era language that was originally intended to allow elections' officials to remove the vote from people convicted of supposedly "black crimes." In Alabama, a felony conviction only triggers disenfranchisement if the crime involves a vaguely defined concept called "moral turpitude." A catch-all term largely defined by county officials in any way they chose, "moral turpitude" was, like the poll tax and the literacy test, a tool used by white authorities during the darkest days of racial segregation to preserve their political dominance over African Americans in the state. Hence people convicted of stealing food--a crime most likely to be committed by impoverished, landless, ex-slaves--lost their vote, while those convicted of a host of violent crimes that were thought to be more frequently committed by whites at the end of the 19th century didn't. -- Democracy Dispatches

Disclosure: the Alabama case is Gooden v. Worley in which Ryan Haygood (of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund) and I are representing the plaintiffs.

Posted by Ed at 4:58 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The New York Times reports: Legislatures in 16 states have loosened voting restrictions on felons over the last decade, according to a new report, a trend hailed by some rights advocates as a step toward democratic principles and fairness, especially for black Americans.

Because of their high incarceration rate, blacks are most affected by the voting bans that vary widely among the states, with many barring current inmates and parolees from voting until they have fulfilled their sentences, and some barring felons for life.

In recent years, Iowa, Nebraska and New Mexico have repealed their lifetime bans on voting by people who have been convicted of felonies, and several other states made it easier for freed prisoners or those on probation to vote, according to the report, issued yesterday by the Sentencing Project, a liberal advocacy group in Washington.

The recent changes have restored voting rights to more than 600,000 individuals, the report said. But because the country’s prison population has continued to rise, a record number of Americans, 5.3 million, are still denied the vote because of criminal records, it concluded. -- States Are Growing More Lenient in Allowing Felons to Vote - New York Times

Note: The Sentencing Project report is here.

Posted by Ed at 7:36 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

AP reports: For the third time in nearly a year, the same federal judge has blocked Georgia from requiring voters to show photo identification before casting a ballot - this time during 30-plus local special elections next week. ...

While Murphy on Thursday again blocked enforcement of the new voter ID law for another round of elections, he didn't prevent the state from moving forward with educating the public about the law in time for the Nov. 7 elections.

In fact, Murphy commended the state for its efforts to inform voters that under the new law they must present at the polls a valid form of government-issued photo ID, such as a driver's license or U.S. passport. ...

Murphy said he will hear arguments later on whether or not the law should be in effect in November. -- Macon Telegraph | 09/15/2006 | Judge blocks Georgia voter ID law

Posted by Ed at 6:36 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

AP reports: The state attorney general has asked the Alabama Supreme Court to delay all parts of a judge's order allowing felons to vote in Alabama.

Attorney General Troy King's motion argues that the entire ruling last month by Jefferson County Circuit Judge Robert Vance Jr. should be shelved until the high court can rule on an appeal.

Vance had ruled last month that felons must be allowed to vote until the Alabama Legislature clarifies crimes of "moral turpitude."

At a Sept. 1 hearing, Vance agreed to stay much of his order until after the Nov. 7 general election and until the Supreme Court could rule on the appeal, but he allowed felons convicted of certain offenses to vote. -- AG asks court to delay judge's felon voting ruling

Comment: Ryan Haygood and I represent the plaintiffs in this case.

Posted by Ed at 7:34 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The New York Times editorlizes today on the Alabama felon voting rights case: It has been decades since federal laws overturned the literacy tests and poll taxes that were the most blatant
forms of discrimination barring black people from voting in Southern states. But even today, felony
disenfranchisement is an enormous obstacle to voting for black people in the Deep South. These laws are the
worst in the free world. The process for restoring voting rights for people who have been convicted of crimes
can be so byzantine that officials don’t know who is eligible. The confusion bars some eligible voters from
the polls for life. -- Denying the Vote

Comment: I am one of the attorneys for the plaintiffs in this case. I have uploaded a PDF of the editorial here.

Posted by Ed at 10:10 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Concord Monitor reports: State officials have discovered that eight House candidates on next week's primary ballots are not actually registered members of their declared political party. The attorney general's office has asked the state Ballot Law Commission to decide whether the candidates should be disqualified from running.

Of the eight, one is an incumbent lawmaker: Rep. Jim Danforth of Andover, who has served one term as a Republican and is seeking re-election to the Legislature as a member of that party. But Danforth is registered to vote as a Democrat, the secretary of state and attorney general discovered recently. They found similar problems with seven other candidates. State law requires candidates for office to run in the primary of their registered political party. ...

State law says that the "name of any person shall not be printed upon the ballot of any party for a primary unless he is a registered member of that party." In addition to Danforth, seven other candidates violate that law:

q Four candidates filed to run as Democrats despite being registered as undeclared voters: Maureen "Mo" Baxley of Andover, Fran Defeo of Conway, Matthew Preston of Seabrook and Greta Cocco of Somersworth.

q Two candidates filed to run as Republicans despite being registered as undeclared: Matthew Covey of Carroll and Ron Peddle of Danville.

q One candidate, Roberto Ordonez of Merrimack, filed to run for the House despite the fact that he was not registered to vote anywhere in the state; when he filed his candidacy, Ordonez said he was a registered Democrat. -- Concord Monitor Online Article - 8 candidates may be tossed from ballot - Your News Source - 03301

Posted by Ed at 7:45 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Steven Taylor writes in the Birmingham News: It is often amazing to note how a specific word or phrase within the law can create a great deal of confusion. Sometimes, such words are used to purposefully create confusion; other times, such words are carelessly chosen. Today's exhibit: "moral turpitude."

Under Alabama law, persons who commit crimes of "moral turpitude" will have their rights to vote revoked. Further, a 2003 law was passed to allow felons who had committed such a crime to petition for restoration of voting rights. Felons who commit felonies that aren't crimes of moral turpitude can vote. ...

The base problem: There is no settled legal definition in Alabama as to what the term "crime of moral turpitude" means. ...

Merriam-Webster's dictionary defines "turpitude" as relating to "inherent baseness; depravity" or refers to "a base act." Given that all felonies are serious crimes, this all begs the question as to what felonies wouldn't be acts of moral turpitude. Even the state Supreme Court's definition (an "act of baseness, vileness or depravity in the private and social duties which a man owes to his fellowmen or to society in general") does little to provide clear direction. -- Banning felon votes not worth time, money

Posted by Ed at 11:36 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

I have posted on EdwardStill.com a set of instructions for registering to vote in Alabama if a person has been convicted of a felony.

Posted by Ed at 1:25 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Alabama Republican Party offers this opinion: The Alabama Republican Party on Thursday said a liberal ruling by Jefferson County Circuit Judge Robert Vance, Jr., who was appointed to office by Don Siegelman, may be an attempt to help Democrats at the ballot box in the fall.

Vance’s controversial ruling ordered registrars to begin allowing felons across the state to register to vote, including those currently incarcerated in Alabama prisons. The state’s chief elections official told the Birmingham News that the ruling might require voting stations to be placed in Alabama prisons.

The head of the Alabama Republican Party responded strongly to the ruling.

“The Alabama Republican Party has consistently opposed the automatic restoration of voting rights for ex-felons, and we certainly don’t believe incarcerated felons should help decide the future of our state,” GOP chair Twinkle Andress Cavanaugh said. “With a tap of his gavel, Don Siegelman’s hand-picked judge may have given convicted drug dealers, and other incarcerated felons the same right to vote that honest and upstanding citizens enjoy.” -- Alabama Republican Party :: News Item

Posted by Ed at 7:04 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Wheeler writes on The Alablawg: I finally had a chance to read Judge Vance’s decision, in which he affirmed Alabama’s power to disenfranchise people convicted of crimes of moral turpitude, but said everyone gets to vote until the legislature defines moral turpitude. It confirmed my initial impression of the decision, as well as my criticisms of Twinkle and her kind.

Overall, it’s a fascinating decision.

The first thing to get straight is what it did not do – say Alabama has to let all felons vote. In Alabama, no one convicted of a crime involving “moral turpitude” can vote. -- Alabama, Felons, Moral Turpitude, And Voting, Part 2 « The Alablawg

Posted by Ed at 6:59 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Standard-Times reports: E. Michael Janson has voted and run for public office from his address at 895 Rockdale Ave. for many years, but he has been frozen out of the city's political life since the Elections Commission told him last November his residence does not qualify him as a registered voter.

"I don't consider myself a homeless person, but even if you do, homeless persons cannot be denied the right to vote simply because they do not have a traditional residence," said Mr. Janson, who has run for mayor six times.

City Solicitor Irene Schall agrees with Mr. Janson. After consulting with the office of the Massachusetts Secretary of State, Ms. Schall said her office has told the Elections Commission that Mr. Janson's voter registration should be reinstated because Massachusetts state law ensures even homeless people the right to vote. ...

The Elections Commission removed Mr. Janson from the voter rolls after a Nov. 22, 2005, hearing in which city resident Evangelos "Gilly" Safioleas filed a complaint that alleged Mr. Janson did not have a legal voting address. The commission nullified Mr. Janson's voter registration because his residence is a garage that does not have heat or running water, and because Mr. Safioleas testified that Mr. Janson actually lived in a rooming house on Elm Street. -- SouthCoastToday.com - City backs candidate's voting right - August 31, 2006

Posted by Ed at 7:39 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Birmingham News editorializes: What exactly is a crime of "moral turpitude?" That is the $64,000 question when it comes to voting rights for felons.

Last week, Jefferson County Circuit Judge Robert Vance Jr. ruled the state must allow all felons to register to vote until the Legislature defines what constitutes crimes of moral turpitude. People convicted of some felonies, including drunken driving and drug possession, he ordered, should be allowed to register to vote immediately, while those convicted of more serious felonies will have to wait for the U.S. Justice Department to review the voting change. ...

State law bans felons found guilty of crimes of moral turpitude from voting unless they apply for and have their voting rights restored by the state Board of Pardons and Paroles. But the law doesn't say exactly what those crimes of moral turpitude are. In the past, attorneys general have given examples of some crimes that fall into the category, but not a complete list. -- Defining `moral turpitude'

Disclosure: Ryan Haygood and I represent the plaintiffs in this suit.

Posted by Ed at 7:29 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Birmingham News reports: Alabama's attorney general says a Jefferson County judge's ruling that would allow all felons to vote is "legally unsound." Friday, he notified the Alabama Supreme Court he plans to appeal.

Separately, Attorney General Troy King asked Circuit Judge Robert Vance Jr. to withhold his order that the ruling be immediately submitted to the U.S. Justice Department for a civil rights review. Vance set a Sept. 1 hearing on the request.

Vance ruled Tuesday that all felons must be allowed to register to vote until the state Legislature passes a law that defines crimes of moral turpitude. But Vance's order is not in force until it is approved by the Justice Department under the federal Voting Rights Act.

Vance said felons who have been convicted of crimes already determined to not involve moral turpitude must be allowed to vote immediately. Attorney general opinions and other legal precedents have determined a handful of crimes such as drunken driving do not involve moral turpitude. -- AG challenges felons' voting rights

Disclosure: Ryan Haygood and I represent the plaintiffs in this case.

Posted by Ed at 5:56 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

AP reports: A Jefferson County judge ordered Wednesday the state of Alabama to allow ex-felons to vote, saying a state law that denies voting rights to felons convicted of crimes of moral turpitude does not identify which crimes fit that definition.

Circuit Court Judge Robert Vance Jr. stayed portions of his order until it could be cleared by the U.S. Justice Department. The federal Voting Rights Act requires that changes in voting law in Alabama be cleared through the Justice Department.

Vance ordered voter registrars in Alabama counties to register ex-felons until "the Alabama Legislature passes, and the governor signs into law, legislation specifically identifying which felonies involve moral turpitude."

The judge's ruling came in a lawsuit filed in Jefferson County by Richard Gooden, who lost his right to vote in 2000 when he was convicted of felony driving under the influence. When Gooden tried to have his voting rights restored he was told that the Alabama secretary of state's office had ordered no felons be registered until the Attorney General Troy King issued an opinion on what crimes do not involve moral turpitude. -- Judge rules state can't stop ex-felons from voting | TimesDaily.com | Times Daily | Florence, AL

Disclosure: I am one of the attorneys for the plaintiffs.

Posted by Ed at 8:51 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

AP reports: U.S. Sen. Joe Lieberman, who relaunched his campaign as an independent after losing the Democratic primary, has enough valid voter signatures to secure a spot on the November ballot, the secretary of the state announced Wednesday.

Lieberman far exceeded the 7,500 signatures necessary to be certified as a third-party candidate, Secretary of the State Susan Bysiewicz said.

His name will appear on the general election ballot under his newly created party, Connecticut for Lieberman. By creating the party, Lieberman secured a position higher on the ballot than he would have had as an independent. -- Lieberman Certified to Appear on Ballot

Posted by Ed at 1:34 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Circuit Court of Jefferson County today issued a judgment on a case seeking to restore many felons' voting rights. Here are the high points of the decree:

Disclosure: Ryan Haygood of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund and I represent the plaintiffs in this case.

Note: I have amended the entry to add the second bullet point.

Posted by Ed at 11:48 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Hale, Kathleen., McNeal, Ramona. and Schmeida, Mary. "The Power of the Franchise: Race, Ethnicity and Predictors of Voting Rights Restoration"

Abstract: Legislative activity in the states suggests that the issue of felon disenfranchisement is rising on the public agenda both within and outside Southern states. Agenda setting theory suggests that interest groups, state and citizen ideology, political context and public demand influence the ability of issues to reach the public agenda. Cross sectional time series is used to analyze legislation in support of restoring voting rights introduced in the fifty states from 2001 through 2005. Findings demonstrate that citizen ideology, the racial composition of state prison populations and the racial composition of state elected officials and administrators are significant influences when controlling for regional effects. States with more liberal citizen views, larger minority populations in state prisons and which have made greater gains in the overall number of black elected officials and administrators are more likely environments for legislative proposals to restore voting rights to felons. -- Download file

Posted by Ed at 5:04 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

From a press release dated 15 August: The National Association of Secretaries of State (NASS) today launched the first-ever national voter education campaign to provide eligible voters from all 50 states with the information they need to cast their ballots in 2006 – all on one Web site. The campaign’s centerpiece, www.canivote.org, is a one-stop shop that provides voters with step-bystep instructions for voting no matter where in the United States they live.

The Can I Vote? Campaign is designed to help answer the two questions voters most often asked in 2004, according to data collected by the Election Protection hotline: “Am I registered to vote?” and “Where is my polling place?” The Campaign Web site provides links to online voter registration lookup tools and polling place locators on state and local Web sites. It also includes an interactive directory of local election officials.

Comment: It may be "50 states" but some of those states have only a few counties -- Alabama has only one.

Posted by Ed at 6:03 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

CQ Politics reports: Republican Shelley Sekula-Gibbs, a Houston city councilwoman, said today that she will ask Texas Republican officials to support her as a consensus write-in candidate in the 22nd Congressional District, where former Majority Leader Tom DeLay’s announced withdrawal has left the party’s ballot line empty for November’s House contest.

Sekula-Gibbs’ application to run — which came a day after an announcement by Sugar Land Mayor David G. Wallace that he would wage a write-in campaign — puts the Republicans in a deep quandary.

Despite the district’s typically strong Republican leanings, the GOP faces a very difficult challenge to defeat the strong takeover bid by Democratic former Rep. Nick Lampson with a write-in campaign, even if just one strong Republican candidate is running. Bids by more than one strong contender likely would split the write-in vote and render the party’s effort futile. -- CQPolitics.com - Second GOP Hopeful Asks for Party Support of Write-In Bid in Texas 22nd

Posted by Ed at 5:10 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reports: If the Port Authority will post ads promoting the Women's Law Project, opposing housing discrimination, honoring Rosa Parks and touting a church's Christmas concert, then why won't it approve one on voting rights?

The American Civil Liberties Union posed that question in a federal lawsuit filed yesterday in conjunction with the Pittsburgh League of Young Voters.

The two groups want to run an advertising campaign to inform ex-criminal offenders in Pennsylvania that they have the right to vote as soon as they leave prison -- even if they remain on probation or parole.

Port Authority refused to use the ads, saying it doesn't display noncommercial advertisements.

The plaintiffs claim that Port Authority doesn't follow its own policies and has practiced content-based discrimination against them, violating both the First and 14th Amendments. -- ACLU sues Port Authority over advertising restrictions

Posted by Ed at 6:43 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Knoxville News Sentinel reports: To Angel Romero, a former drug dealer who would someday like to vote, a recent revision to state law that makes it easier for felons to regain their voting rights after serving their sentence was long overdue.

Still, the new law might not go far enough, because it will likely end up discriminating against poor people, especially minorities, according to a panel that discussed the issue Monday at the Beck Cultural Exchange Center. ...

Until May, when the law in Tennessee was changed, felons had to go through the cumbersome and often expensive process of going before a judge if they wanted to regain their right to vote.

The new law, however, creates a uniform process that allows most felons to vote if they have completed their sentence, paid their court-ordered restitution, and aren't behind on child support payments.

Renee Paradis, associate counsel with the Brennan Center for Justice at the New York University School of Law, said Tennessee's child support provision was troubling because it could result in some people being barred from voting because of their financial situation. -- KnoxNews: Local

Posted by Ed at 6:27 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

AP reports: The Colorado Supreme Court on Monday upheld a state law that prohibits convicted felons from voting while they are on parole, a ruling that will keep some 6,000 people from casting ballots this year.

Colorado law denies felons the right to vote while they are serving their sentences, and the justices said in a unanimous opinion that parole must be considered part of a sentence. ...

Attorneys for Danielson, the Colorado Criminal Justice Coalition and Colorado-CURE argued that under the state Constitution, prisoners' voting rights should be restored when they are released from prison, even if they are still on parole.

But the Supreme Court agreed with the secretary of state and Denver District Judge Michael Martinez, who said convicted felons have not served their full sentence until all components - including parole - are completed. -- Colo. Court Upholds Ban on Parolee Voting

Posted by Ed at 3:11 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

AP reports: With no Democratic runoff for statewide offices, George Wallace Jr. is telling Democrats they are welcome to cross over to the Republican runoff July 18 to vote for him for lieutenant governor.

His runoff opponent, Luther Strange, said seeking Democratic crossover voters has backfired on GOP candidates who did it in previous Republican runoffs.

"Addressing our message to Democrats is not a strong strategy," Strange said.

In a speech Thursday to the Lincoln Kiwanis Club, Wallace recounted how the Republican Party has an open primary and runoff. People who voted in the Democratic primary on June 6 can cross party lines and vote in the Republican runoff on July 18, he said. -- montgomeryadvertiser.com :: Wallace encourages crossover voting

Posted by Ed at 4:50 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

A lawyer in the case emails me: Thursday afternoon the Eastern District of Washington (Judge Robert H. Whaley) issued the attached adverse ruling in favor of Defendants in Farrakhan v. Gregoire, our challenge to Washington State's racially discriminatory felon disfranchisement regime. The Court, on Cross-Motions for Summary Judgment, granted Defendants' Motion, thereby dismissing the case in its entirety.

Needless to say, we are extremely disappointed by this decision on its merits, particularly because the Court found that Plaintiffs presented "compelling evidence of racial discrimination and bias in Washington's criminal justice system," and that such discrimination "clearly hinder[s] the ability of racial minorities to participate effectively in the political process."

Though the Court concluded that it "has no doubt that members of racial minorities have experienced discrimination in Washington's criminal justice system," it held that "[o]ther factors, particularly Washington's history, or lack thereof, of racial bias in its electoral process and in its decision to enact the felon disenfranchisement provisions, counterbalance the contemporary discriminatory effects that result from the day-to-day functioning of Washington's criminal justice system."

Posted by Ed at 8:46 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Birmingham News reports: A federal lawsuit filed by three Alabamians who accused Secretary of State Nancy Worley and some county registrars of denying certain felons the right to vote has been dismissed.

A three-judge panel Friday ended the lawsuit filed by the NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund on behalf of Dothan resident Ekeyesto Doss and Richard Gooden and Andrew Jones, both of Birmingham. The judges found the men lacked the legal standing to bring the case.

"None of the plaintiffs have a current injury that a favorable decision could remedy," the judges wrote.

Doss, Gooden and Jones contended Worley violated Alabama's constitution by requiring all felons to apply to the Board of Pardons and Paroles to have voting rights restored.

The suit said the state constitution is clear that people convicted of certain felonies such as DUI and drug possession - unlike rape, robbery or murder - do not lose their voting rights and do not need to apply for an eligibility certificate from the board. -- Voting rights suit focused on felons dismissed due to no legal standing

Posted by Ed at 8:50 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

On Friday, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama dismissed a challenge to the practice of the Secretary of State of encouraging registrars to bar applicants convicted of any felony from registering. The State Constitution bars only those convicted of felonies involving moral turpitude. The NAACP Legal Defense Fund and I had brought suit under Section of the Voting Rights Act to require the Secretary of State to cease this practice until she obtained preclearance for it. You can download the file here.

Posted by Ed at 7:29 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

AP reports: The Senate approved a bill Thursday that could pave the way for convicted felons on probation or parole to gain the right to vote.

Last year the General Assembly approved sending the issue to the ballot for voters to decide if they want to amend the state constitution to allow felons to vote. Thursday's bill details the process for registering felons to vote and is contingent on voter approval of the ballot question in November.

The Department of Corrections would provide the felons with voter registration forms and offer help to fill them out.

Sponsors of bill are mostly Providence's lawmakers who have a significant number of constituents serving probation or parole.

The legislators said Rhode Island has the nation's second highest rate of people on probation and is the only state in New England that prohibits voting for residents serving time in prison or on probation or parole. -- Felons' right to vote goes to the ballot - Boston.com

Posted by Ed at 6:42 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Breaking News.ie reports: A senior legal adviser at the European Union’s court of justice in Luxembourg today sided with Spain in a legal case launched against Britain, agreeing that electoral laws in Gibraltar allowing non-EU citizens the right to vote in European elections violated EU treaty rules.

In his legal opinion to the EU court, Advocate General Antonio Tizzano said that, while Britain had an obligation to extend voting rights to British citizens in Gibraltar, a 2003 act to extend such rights to citizens of the British Commonwealth who are not British or citizens of any other EU country “infringes� EU law. -- BreakingNews.ie: Spain 'partly backed' over Gibraltar voting rights

Posted by Ed at 7:26 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Jerusalem Post reports: Voting has closed in Israel's prisons, and a total of 53 percent of the 9000 prisoners eligible to vote in the elections for the 17th Knesset exercised their right. -- Jerusalem Post | Breaking News from Israel, the Middle East and the Jewish World

Posted by Ed at 7:21 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

AP reports: The state will appeal a King County judge's ruling that restores voting rights to convicted felons who have served their time but owe court-imposed fines, Attorney General Rob McKenna and Secretary of State Sam Reed announced today.

In a joint written statement, McKenna and Reed said each state has the right to "determine the process for restoring voting rights to felons."

"We believe a rational basis does exist for the Legislature to deny felons the right to vote until they have completed their entire court-ordered sentences, including payment of criminal penalties, victim's restitution, and legal fees, rather than separating out various sentencing aspects," they wrote.

King County Superior Court Judge Michael Spearman ruled Monday that the state's requirement that ex-felons pay all court-ordered fines and fees before they can vote again violates the equal-protection clauses in the U.S. Constitution and the state constitution. -- The Seattle Times: Local News: State to appeal ruling granting voting rights to felons who owe fines

Posted by Ed at 9:20 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

AP reports: Convicted felons who have served their time but owe court-imposed fines cannot be denied the right to vote, a King County Superior Court judge ruled Monday.

Washington prohibits felons currently on probation, in prison, or on parole from voting. Ex-felons in the state also must satisfy all court-related costs before getting their rights restored. More than 150,000 ex-felons are unable to vote, about 3.6 percent of the state's population.

"It is well recognized that there is simply no rational relationship between the ability to pay and the exercise of constitutional rights," Judge Michael Spearman wrote. -- King County court rules convicted felons with outstanding fines can vote

Posted by Ed at 8:32 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Census Bureau has released Voting and Registrationin the Election of November 2004. The report covers turnout and registration rates by

Posted by Ed at 8:28 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Montgomery Advertiser reports: Republican gubernatorial candidate Roy Moore answered directly Wednesday when he was asked whether voters are capable of picking delegates for a state constitutional convention.

"No." ...

A woman brought up the subject of constitutional reform and wanted to know if Moore thought the people of Alabama "had enough sense" to elect representatives to a constitutional convention.

The former state Supreme Court chief opposes rewriting the document state constitution, a document that has been criticized for being voluminous and out of date. -- montgomeryadvertiser.com�::� Moore says voters not capable

Posted by Ed at 8:03 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Virgin Islands Daily News reports: Court procedures are again in motion to make a long-awaited decision on a federal court case demanding that territory residents who are United States citizens be represented with votes in Congress and be allowed to vote for president.

The first hearing since 2002 in a voting rights case filed by St. Thomas resident Krim Ballentine went forward in District Court on Monday morning. New Jersey District Judge Anne Thompson made no decisions, but she pronounced the case - completely argued and briefed years ago - ripe for judgment.

Ballentine, a St. Thomas activist and 2004 candidate for V.I. delegate to Congress, filed a lawsuit in District Court in 1999 challenging the Revised Organic Act of 1954. Ballentine's lawsuit claims that he is a disenfranchised voter because he is a U.S. citizen but has no real representation in the federal government.

Residents of the Virgin Islands - and other U.S. territories and possessions - are not represented in the Electoral College, which selects the nation's president. While all states have two U.S. senators and members of the House of Representatives based on population, the Virgin Islands - as well as other U.S. territories and possessions and the District of Columbia - is represented in Congress only by a nonvoting delegate who can propose legislation and serve on committees. -- Virgin Islands, Virgin Islands Newspaper, A Pulitzer Prize Winning Newspaper, Virgin Islands Guide, Virgin Islands Info

Posted by Ed at 4:19 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

AP reports: The Supreme Court turned down an appeal Monday that sought to open U.S. presidential elections to voters in Puerto Rico.

The court's action, taken without comment, is the latest setback in a long-running legal fight over voting rights of residents of the U.S. territory.

Attorney Gregorio Igartua, who filed the appeal, said that "for 107 years and 22 presidential elections since Puerto Rico became part of the United States, the American citizens of Puerto Rico" have been unfairly treated. He told justices that the residents have "an inferior type of American citizenship." -- CNN.com - Puerto Ricans dealt blow in U.S. presidential vote - Mar 20, 2006

Posted by Ed at 9:11 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

Ryan Paul Haygood writes in the Birmingham News: Alabama's constitution, which was passed into law by the people, permits those convicted of felony offenses not involving "moral turpitude" to register to vote. Alabama's courts, the state attorney general and the state Board of Pardons and Paroles also have made it clear that people convicted of felony offenses like Gooden's, such as driving under the influence of alcohol or drug possession, do not lose their voting rights.

Unfortunately, Secretary of State Nancy Worley, the state's chief election official, is flouting Alabama's constitution and laws by advising county registrars throughout Alabama to refuse to register these potential voters unless they have a Certificate of Eligibility from the Board of Pardons and Paroles, a document they do not need and indeed cannot receive.

The secretary of state's behavior is a symptom of "felon disfranchisement creep," a practice that occurs when election officials - whether intentionally or through ignorance of the law - improperly expand existing felon disfranchisement laws to deny the vote to eligible citizens. -- State doesn't need repeat of vote denial

The article is also available here.

Posted by Ed at 6:22 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Ocean City Dispatch reports: A bill introduced in the Maryland General Assembly, which, if passed, would extend voting rights to non-resident property owners in municipalities where at least 75 percent of the real estate is owned by non-resident property owners, is directly related to Ocean City and could change the face of government and politics in the resort forever.

Enfranchising non-resident property owners in Ocean City is certainly not a new issue and has been debated in the resort for decades. Currently, over 90 percent of all real estate in the resort, including commercial property, is owned by non-resident property owners with around 77 percent of the residential property owned by out-of-towners.

Conversely, just 2,600 of the roughly 32,000 residential units in Ocean City are currently owner-occupied year round, but the small resident owner minority has all of the political clout in the resort. The vast number of disenfranchised non-resident property owners in Ocean City has made appeals in the past to gain voting rights in the resort to no avail, but a bill introduced in the General Assembly could settle the decades-old issue once and for all.

House Bill 1508, introduced by Frederick County Delegate Galen Clagett, attempts to address the issue of voting rights for non-resident property owners in a municipality. The bill states if more than 75 percent of the property in a municipality is owned by persons who reside outside the municipality, the municipal government shall grant the non-resident property owners the right to vote and participate in elections. -- Nonresident Voting Bill Linked To Ocean City

Posted by Ed at 8:09 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Muskogee Phoenix reports: Cherokee Freedman retain tribal citizenship under the tribe’s 1975 constitution and are legally entitled to vote, the tribe’s highest court ruled 2-1 Tuesday.

“This will end up being a decision of historic importance,� said Tahlequah attorney Nate Young III, a Cherokee.

Freedmen will again have the right to access tribal services and to vote in tribal elections, Young said.

Judicial Appeals Tribunal Justices Tracy Leeds and Darrell Dowty concurred that to exclude a class of citizens from membership, the constitution would have to do so with specific and clear language.

“Exclusion cannot be left to inference by omission or by silence.,� Dowty said.

Lucy Allen, 73, a Freedmen, sued the tribal council, the tribal registrar and the tribal registration committee in November 2004 because legislation at the time said she had to prove she was “Cherokee by blood.� -- Freedmen are tribal citizens

"Freedmen" are the descendants of slaves owned by the Cherokees. The Court's decision is here.

Posted by Ed at 7:55 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Virgin Islands News reports: The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reassigned the lawsuit demanding that territory residents have the rights to vote for president and have voting representation in Congress to a federal judge from New Jersey.

Krim Ballentine, a St. Thomas activist and 2004 candidate for V.I. delegate to Congress, filed a lawsuit in District Court in 1999 challenging the Revised Organic Act of 1954.

Residents of the Virgin Islands - and other U.S. territories and possessions - are not represented in the Electoral College, which selects the nation's president. While all states have two U.S. senators and members of the House of Representatives based on population, the Virgin Islands - as well as other U.S. territories and possessions and the District of Columbia - is represented in Congress only by a nonvoting delegate who can propose legislation and serve on committees.

Ballentine, a retired U.S. marshal who was born in the mainland United States, said that his lawsuit was a measure of last resort. The government that transferred him to the Virgin Islands did not warn him that he would be losing his right to vote for president when he moved here. -- Virgin Islands, Virgin Islands Newspaper, A Pulitzer Prize Winning Newspaper, Virgin Islands Guide, Virgin Islands Info

Thanks to Michael Richardson for the tip.

Posted by Ed at 5:08 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The New York Times reports: It is increasingly expensive to be a criminal.

Beverly Dubois, a 49-year-old former park ranger in Washington State, spent nine months in jail for growing and selling marijuana. She still owes the state almost $1,900 for court costs and various fees. Until she pays up, the state has taken away her right to vote.

Wilbert Rideau, 64, a convicted killer, spent 44 years in Louisiana prisons. Not long after he was released last year, he filed for bankruptcy in an effort to avoid the state's attempts to collect $127,000 in court costs.

Almost every encounter with the criminal justice system these days can give rise to a fee. There are application fees and co-payments for public defenders. Sentences include court costs, restitution and contributions to various funds. In Washington State, people convicted of certain crimes are also charged $100 so their DNA can be put in a database. -- Debt to Society Is Least of Costs for Ex-Convicts - New York Times

Posted by Ed at 7:44 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

AP reports: Lawmakers are weighing a proposed constitutional amendment that would automatically restore voting rights to felons completing their sentence, probation and paying restitution.

But, with the legislative session reaching its halfway point, it's main sponsor, Rep. Jesse Crenshaw, D-Lexington, and groups supporting House Bill 480 fear time will run out if it isn't heard by a House committee soon.

"I think the right to vote is such a critical right that it helps show ex-offenders that they are, in fact, being included in our society," Crenshaw said.

Gov. Ernie Fletcher's administration, along with some commonwealth's attorneys, oppose the measure. -- WHAS11.com | News for Louisville, Kentucky | Top Stories

Posted by Ed at 7:41 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Washington Times reports: Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr. yesterday vowed to veto a bill that would restore voting rights to felons, including the state's most violent criminals, immediately upon their release from prison.

"I don't think you reward the franchise to those who commit the most horrific crimes," Mr. Ehrlich, a Republican, told The Washington Times. "Full restoration of every right is inappropriate."

Dozens of House Democrats have co-sponsored legislation that would allow about 150,000 murderers, rapists, robbers and other felons to vote this year, and the state Democratic Party has endorsed the bill.

The bill's lead sponsor -- Delegate Salima Siler Marriott, Baltimore Democrat -- said yesterday that Mr. Ehrlich's position reinforces the racist underpinnings of the state law that denies the vote to felons, of whom about 85,000 are black. -- Ehrlich to veto bill on felons-Metropolitan-The Washington Times, America's Newspaper

Posted by Ed at 7:55 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

AP reports: Several black lawmakers expressed their support Thursday for a bill that would automatically restore voting rights to convicted felons upon their release from prison.

State Sen. Bobby Singleton, D-Greensboro, who is sponsoring the bill, said the current system, which requires felons to apply for a voting certificate, has created long delays in restoring voting rights and disenfranchises inmates who have already "paid their debt to society."

About two dozen advocates for voting rights restoration joined Singleton, Sen. Quinton Ross, D-Montgomery, Rep. Yvonne Kennedy, D-Mobile, and Rep. Ralph Howard, D-Greensboro, on the Statehouse steps Thursday, holding handwritten signs reading "Unlock the Vote" and "Unlock the Block" at the news conference.

The bill states that of the 262,000 felons who have lost their voting rights under Alabama's law, half are black. Ross told reporters that while the law disproportionately affects blacks, who make up only 25 percent of the state population, voting rights should be everyone's concern. -- Welcome to TimesDaily.com

Posted by Ed at 7:29 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

The Columbus GA Ledger-Enquirer reports: After listening to an hour of lawyers' arguments Thursday about who should represent the state in the case challenging Russell County Commissioner Ronnie Reed's right to keep his post, a Houston County, Ala., judge said he'll decide that issue next week.

At the heart of the challenge is whether Reed, convicted of burglary in Columbus in 1975, is legally holding office. Reed, 51, served five years on probation after his conviction for burglarizing Safe Lite Optical on Jacqueline Drive nearly 31 years ago.

According to Alabama law, a convicted felon not pardoned in the state where the offense occurred is not eligible to hold public office in Alabama. Reed's voting rights were restored at the end of his sentence, but his political rights weren't restored by the Georgia Board of Pardons and Paroles until December -- after the challenge was filed and more than a year after he was elected. Reed, who didn't attend the hearing, represents Russell County District 4. -- Ledger-Enquirer | 02/10/2006 | Judge holds off on Reed case

Posted by Ed at 7:20 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Washington Times reports: Democratic lawmakers, who have long pushed to restore voting rights to Maryland felons, say racial politics and election-year considerations make this the year they open the polls to every ex-convict.

"This law seriously disenfranchises a large number of African-Americans," said Delegate Salima Siler Marriott, a black Baltimore Democrat who is gathering sponsors for a voting-rights restoration bill she plans to submit.

"Their disenfranchisement impacts the power of African-Americans in this state," said Mrs. Marriott, whose bill would give all felons the vote immediately upon release from prison.

If Mrs. Marriott's bill succeeds this time -- it has died in committee the past three years -- an estimated 150,000 felons would be able to cast ballots in Maryland. About 85,000 of them are black and likely Democrats, according to Justice Maryland, a penal reform group that supports felon voting rights. -- Measure restores vote to all felons-Metropolitan-The Washington Times, America's Newspaper

Posted by Ed at 6:23 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Lorraine C. Minnite writes on Democracy Dispatches: From the editorial pages of the Wall Street Journal, to pundits like Michelle Malkin, the vast rightwing political blogosphere, and the Republican Policy Committee of the U.S. Senate, voter fraud is being trumpeted as a dire threat to American democracy. The proffered antidote: restore integrity to our electoral system through "reform" by way of stricter voter identification requirements at the polls.

Before the 2004 election, Malkin warned that, "Voter fraud is breaking out all over." To back up her claim, she followed the standard formula used by voter fraud scaremongers--she rattled off on-going "investigations;" she vilified the "motor voter" law, citing no evidence connecting the law to fraud; she bemoaned a lack of "swift, stiff punishment" for violators and blamed for the alleged fraud the "illegal alien lobby and ethnic grievance groups" or anyone else who opposed the new voter ID movement. ...

The fact is there is no data supporting the argument that voter fraud of the kind conjured by the Right is imperiling American democracy. None. -- Democracy Dispatches

Posted by Ed at 10:27 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reports: Georgia lawmakers on Tuesday moved closer to final approval of a bill requiring that voters show some form of government-issued photo identification at the polls.

The Georgia Senate voted 32-22 in favor of the measure, mostly on party lines, overriding the protests of many Democrats who contended that it would disenfranchise poor, black and elderly voters while doing nothing to effectively combat vote fraud.

Republican Senate leaders said they have listened to those concerns and have worked to make the new voter ID measure a better piece of legislation. They said they are confident that this version will withstand legal challenges.

Last year, the Legislature approved and Gov. Sonny Perdue signed into law a measure requiring government-issued photo identification for Georgia voters. But in October, U.S. District Judge Harold Murphy temporarily suspended the law, calling it an unconstitutional poll tax that would not effectively prevent vote fraud. -- Senate approves voter ID | ajc.com

Posted by Ed at 7:30 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

AP reports: Voter identification - the issue that in the past year has prompted walkouts, a lawsuit and heated debates that saw some lawmakers singing spirituals and brandishing shackles - is set to return to the state Capitol this week.

Tuesday, the Senate is expected to take up the thorny issue of requiring Georgia voters to show a picture ID when they arrive at the polls.

The vote, which is expected to pass in the Republican-dominated Senate largely along party lines, would set the new law in motion for the second time in two years and would need a signature by Gov. Sonny Perdue and approval by the U.S. Department of Justice if it is to go into effect before this year's elections.

The legislation would require a driver's license, military ID or a state-issued identification card with a photo to vote. It removes several forms of identification currently accepted, including Social Security cards, birth certificates and utility bills. -- Macon Telegraph | 01/23/2006 | Voter ID heading back before Ga. legislators

Posted by Ed at 7:30 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

AP reports: A Democratic opponent of Georgia's voter identification law on Thursday blasted Secretary of State Cathy Cox for supporting an allotment of more than $2 million to defend the law.

"This vote is a betrayal," state Sen. Gloria Butler said. "It is a vote against every poor, minority and elderly voter in the state."

Cox, who is seeking the Democratic nomination for governor, opposes the voter ID law, which critics have dubbed racist. But, as chairwoman of the state Elections Board, Cox this week voted to provide $2 million to pay for future legal fees in the case. Cox's vote broke a 2-2 tie on the board.

Her spokesman, Chris Riggall, said that as a state official Cox was responsible for ensuring that the state's legal bills are paid. The state elections board and Cox herself are named as defendants in the lawsuit. -- AP Wire | 01/19/2006 | Cox draws fire for voting to fund defense of state's voter ID law

Posted by Ed at 9:21 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Birmingham News reports: A state senator has proposed a bill that would automatically restore voting rights to felons who are eligible.

Bobby Singleton, D-Greensboro, said his bill would end the need for felons to apply to the Alabama Board of Pardons and Paroles. Felons would be able to go the county registrars, he said.

Singleton said his bill would strengthen a 2003 law, which allows most Alabama felons to apply to the parole board for approval to vote. "When you look at the bill that has already passed, we've had a lot of problems with it."

He said the number of people who have applied for their voting rights to be returned has resulted in long delays for the board, keeping eligible offenders from voting for many months. -- Bill proposes automatically restoring voting rights

Posted by Ed at 8:07 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

CBC News reports: Advance polls opened across the country Friday, including at the Stony Mountain Institution, north of Winnipeg, where inmates cast their ballots in the federal election.

Inmates were allowed a few at a time into an open area in the prison where a polling station was set up. Officials at the institution expect voter turnout to exceed 50 per cent.

Many inmates said they had a strong interest in the parties' crime and justice platforms.

Les Henry, who was convicted of manslaughter for killing his wife, would not say how he voted, but he said the mandatory minimum sentences proposed by all three major parties would not work. -- CBC Manitoba - Inmates interested in parties' law-and-order platforms

Posted by Ed at 8:06 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

AP reports: The Alabama Republican Party won't ban crossover voting by Democrats in the Republican runoff June 27.

The Alabama Republican Party's steering committee voted unanimously Friday not to pursue a ban at this time.

The 21-member steering committee had originally recommended that the 350-member State Republican Executive Committee vote today to ban crossover voting.

But after getting feedback from party members and voters, the committee voted Friday to study the issue more. It directed party Chairman Twinkle Andress Cavanaugh to appoint a group to conduct the study and make recommendations. --
Republican committee holds off ban on crossover voting

Posted by Ed at 11:53 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)