Supreme Court won't block Texas photo ID law — yet

The Supreme Court ruled for the second time on Texas' strict photo ID law.(Photo: Tamir Kalifa, AP)

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court refused Friday to block Texas' photo ID law, the strictest in the nation, from remaining in effect for now, but it left open the possibility of doing so this summer if a lower court challenge remains unresolved.

Civil rights groups who say the law discriminates against black and Hispanic voters had argued that it should be blocked because it was struck down by a federal court in 2014 and a three-judge appeals court panel last year. The full U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit will hear the case next month.

The justices said they would reconsider their decision on or after July 20 if the appeals court has not decided the case by then. That would give state election officials more than three months to prepare voters for the November elections.

"The court recognizes the time constraints the parties confront in light of the scheduled elections in November 2016," the one-paragraph order stated.

The law's challengers cheered the action, even though it didn't give them everything they sought. “We’re very encouraged that the U.S. Supreme Court recognizes the time constraints involved in this case,” said Gerry Hebert, executive director of the Campaign Legal Center.

It was the second time the high court had refused to block the photo ID law. In October 2014, the justices allowed Texas to enforce it in its pending November elections. That order was not signed, but Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg filed a blistering six-page dissent, joined by Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan.

"The greatest threat to public confidence in elections in this case is the prospect of enforcing a purposefully discriminatory law, one that likely imposes an unconstitutional poll tax and risks denying the right to vote to hundreds of thousands of eligible voters," Ginsburg said at the time.

USA TODAY

Supreme Court rules Texas can enforce voter ID law

The law is the strictest in the nation, permitting only certain types of photo ID at the polls. Gun licenses are included; college IDs are not. It was enacted to cut down on in-person voter fraud, but critics said only two people were convicted of impersonating others at the polls during a recent 10-year period.

A federal district judge in Corpus Christi originally struck down the law in 2014 after a two-week trial. Judge Nelva Gonzales Ramos ruled it was passed by the Texas state Legislature in 2011 with a "discriminatory purpose" and could disenfranchise about 600,000 voters, a disproportionate number of whom are black or Hispanic.

Texas' photo ID law has been in effect since 2014. (Photo: LM Otero, AP)

Days later, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit blocked Ramos' order from taking effect while the state appealed, and the Supreme Court upheld that ruling. As a result, the photo ID requirement has been used in state and local elections despite the continuing court challenge.

A federal appeals court panel agreed last August that the law was discriminatory but urged the two sides to come up with a compromise plan. Then last month, the full appeals court decided to rehear the case, now scheduled for May.

Civil rights groups had asked the Supreme Court to stop the law from being implemented in the meantime, out of concern that preparations for the November elections might be too advanced to change the rules without sowing confusion among voters.

"Waiting those several months could be fatal," opponents argued in their brief to the high court. "Texas voters should not be forced to forfeit their right to vote in yet another election."

Texas had urged the justices to let the law stand during the appeals process. Solicitor General Scott Keller noted that the appeals court's three-judge panel, while striking down the law as discriminatory, also ruled that it was not passed with that intent and did not constitute a poll tax.

"Voter-ID laws are legitimate means to combat election fraud and safeguard voter confidence," Keller argued.

The Texas law originally was blocked by federal officials shortly after taking effect in 2011, under a section of the Voting Rights Act requiring mostly Southern states to clear proposed voting changes with the federal government. The Supreme Court struck down that requirement in June 2013, freeing state officials to reinstate the law.

Read More

U.S. Supreme Court Lets Texas Voter ID Law Stand During Appeal

The Supreme Court on Friday allowed Lone-Star State to still enforce a law requiring voters to point out identification at the polls, a reversal for civil rights challengers UN agency aforementioned the law might build it troublesome for a large range of minorities to forged a ballot in November.

The court, in an exceedingly transient written order, declined to disturb a lower-court action that has allowed Lone-Star State to use its voter-ID law whereas judicial proceeding over the live continues, as well as throughout its recent election in March.

The court’s order, that didn’t note any dissents, aforementioned the parties might renew their request if lower courts haven’t acted by late July. associate degree judicature is slated to listen to arguments within the case in late could.

A group of challengers to the law, as well as U.S. Rep. brandy Veasey (D., Texas) and a Hispanic civil rights organization, have argued the identification demand ought to be placed on hold throughout the judicial proceeding as a result of Lone-Star State would before long begin implementing procedures for the November elections.

Texas has aforementioned its law won’t stop any of the challengers from balloting.

The 2011 law, signed by then-Gov. Rick Perry, needs voters to gift a state driver’s license, personal identification card or hid firearm license, a military identification card, or a U.S. passport or citizenship certificate.

The challengers argued the wants obligatory outlawed obstacles to balloting rights. In 2014, a administrative district choose in Corpus Christi, Texas, agreed. The judge, once reciting history of racially-discriminatory election practices within the state, aforementioned the law obligatory “an unconstitutional burden on the correct to vote, has associate degree impermissible discriminatory result against Hispanics and African-Americans, associate degreed was obligatory with an unconstitutional discriminatory purpose.”

The state appealed to the Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, in metropolis, that allowed the citizen ID law to require result whereas the judicial proceeding continuing. Last August, a three-judge panel of the Fifth Circuit issued a mixed ruling. The panel in agreement that the law burdened minorities, however it threw out the district judge’s finding that the law-makers had meant to discriminate.

The panel ordered the parties to look at ways that to relax the wants to ease the impact on minority voters, UN agency would possibly lack the specified identification. however the case then took another twist: The judicature in March proclaimed it'd rethink the sooner appeals call, with a bigger listing of judges collaborating. A ruling isn’t expected before summer, at the earliest.

Some thirty states have adopted voter-identification needs of 1 kind or another. A 2008 Supreme Court call upheld associate degree Hoosier State citizen ID law, however aforementioned the validity of such measures normally would depend upon their specific provisions and therefore the impact that they had on citizen participation.

Read More