DOJ seeks to participate in lawsuit challenging anti-democratic Mississippi law

[link removed]
07/14/2023

This week in New York, a court ordered a congressional map be redrawn, while the U.S. Department of Justice asked to join a lawsuit in an effort to challenge an anti-democratic law in Mississippi. Despite both of these positive developments, Republicans in Congress introduced an omnibus elections bill with restrictive provisions that outline what representatives hope Republican-majority state legislatures will pursue ahead of 2024.

As Republicans in Washington D.C. and across the country pursue some of the most restrictive voting rights legislation in decades, the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Moore v. Harper ([link removed]) to reaffirm that state legislatures can and should be checked by state Supreme Courts when necessary seems particularly pertinent.

But, as Marc Elias wrote ([link removed]) this week, “[w]e cannot let the focus on this one case, as important as it was, obscure the fact that threats to our democracy come in many forms.”

============================================================

A Win in New York: Court Requires Redraw of Congressional Map

Yesterday in New York, an appellate state court ** ordered ([link removed])
the state’s Independent Redistricting Commission (IRC) to redraw its congressional map. This decision stems from a ** lawsuit ([link removed])
brought in June 2022 by New York voters, alleging that the IRC failed to complete its mandatory redistricting duties.
* After the release of 2020 census data in April 2021, the commission could not reach a consensus on new maps so it presented two different plans to the Legislature — one by Democratic members of the IRC and one by Republican members of the IRC — and the Legislature rejected both. The IRC never presented a second set of maps to the Legislature.

The court concluded that democracy relies on the IRC completing its mandatory duty: “The right to participate in the democratic process is the most essential right in our system of governance. The procedures governing the redistricting process, all too easily abused by those who would seek to minimize the voters’ voice and entrench themselves in the seats of power, must be guarded as jealously as the right to vote itself; in granting this petition, we return the matter to its constitutional design. Accordingly, we direct the IRC to commence its duties forthwith.”

New York’s redistricting process has been long and winding — and especially after yesterday’s decision, it’s still ongoing. Democracy Docket case coordinator Madeleine Greenberg ** breaks down the entire timeline here. ([link removed])

DOJ Seeks to Intervene in Mississippi Federal Case

On Wednesday, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) ** asked ([link removed])
to join a federal lawsuit challenging two recently enacted anti-democratic laws in Mississippi, House Bill 1020 and Senate Bill 2343. Both laws target Jackson, Mississippi’s majority-Black population.
* H.B. 1020 creates a new court system with an unelected judge in an area of Jackson — the state’s capital city with a population that is over 80% Black. Under H.B. 1020’s new court system, an unelected judge — appointed by the white, conservative chief justice of the Mississippi Supreme Court — would have jurisdiction over certain criminal and civil cases within the state’s Capitol Complex Improvement District (CCID), a special district in Jackson centered around the state capitol building with its own police force.
* S.B. 2343 places Jackson’s predominantly Black population under control of state-run Capitol Police by expanding the CCID’s boundaries in order to give the Capitol Police jurisdiction over the entirety of Jackson.

In seeking to participate in the lawsuit, the DOJ challenges H.B. 1020, but not S.B. 2343. The DOJ argues that H.B. 1020 "intentionally discriminates" against Black residents and violates the 14th Amendment.

Earlier this week, the DOJ also ** submitted ([link removed])
a statement in a lawsuit challenging Florida's "wet signature" requirement for voter registration. The DOJ refutes the Republican National Committee’s arguments and maintains that the ** Materiality Provision ([link removed])
of the Civil Rights Act can be enforced by private parties.

House Republicans Unveil Most Restrictive Elections Bill in Decades

On Monday, House Republicans ** unveiled ([link removed])
the American Confidence in Elections (ACE) Act, a sweeping “election integrity” bill, which would recommend policy changes nationwide and overhaul elections in Washington, D.C.

House Administration Committee Chairman Bryan Steil (R-Wis.), who is the bill’s primary sponsor, introduced the ACE Act as “the most conservative election integrity bill to be seriously considered in the House in over 20 years.” It includes almost 50 standalone bills and is focused on multiple Republican priorities, such as tightening election rules, encouraging voter purges and loosening campaign finance regulations.

Although the ACE Act largely offers recommendations for states to adopt, it would enact sweeping changes to election policy in Washington, D.C. as part of Congress’ authority over the nation’s capital. The changes to Washington, D.C. elections are intended to become a model for other states to emulate. The bill would:
* Require a photo ID to vote, both in-person and by mail,
* Ban same-day voter registration and require annual list maintenance cleanup,
* Prohibit community ballot collection and restrict drop boxes,
* Bar universal mail-in voting,
* Mandate signature verification for all mail-in ballots,
* Direct the district to only count mail-in ballots that are received before the polls close on Election Day and
* Require audits after every election.

While the ACE Act is almost certain to die in the Democratic-majority Senate, this bill ** showcases ([link removed])
the harmful wishlist of election provisions that Republicans are already pursuing across the country.

Were the Decisions of ‘23 Supreme After All?

A lot happened at the nation’s highest court this past term. While we take a breather until the next term begins in October, we pulled together ** all the voting and election cases ([link removed])
argued at the U.S. Supreme Court over the last few years and some of the landmark cases before that. ** Check out our Supreme Court resource page here. ([link removed])

This past term ** proved ([link removed])
to be an important one for democracy, with two landmark voting rights cases and a slew of smaller decisions influencing our elections. Among the most significant news out of the Court this term were two major voting rights decisions. The two cases, ** Allen v. Milligan ([link removed])
and ** Moore v. Harper ([link removed])
, both represented serious threats to American democracy by threatening to diminish the influence of minority voters and granting unchecked power to state legislatures.

While there were many different
** takeaways ([link removed])
about how the Court decided its two landmark voting rights cases this term, experts agree that when we see the Voting Rights Act tested again, it is likely to be more thoroughly threatened.

Democrats Continue Pursue Multiple Avenues of Judicial Reform

Democrats made two moves this week in the party’s ongoing efforts to reshape the federal judiciary and embrace widespread judicial reform efforts, as the public increasingly doubts the ** impartiality ([link removed])
of our federal courts.

First, on Monday, Senate Democrats ** sent ([link removed])
a letter to the chair of the rule-making committee for federal courts asking to end single-judge divisions, which effectively allow litigants to select which judge hears their case. Critics, like Sen. Mazie K. Hirono (D-H.I.), call the practice “** judge shopping ([link removed])
” or “** forum shopping ([link removed])
.”
* In an ** interview ([link removed])
with the New York Times, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) pointed to the ** case ([link removed])
involving mifepristone (a hormone-blocker used in regimen with misoprostol to end a pregnancy) that was filed in Amarillo, Texas as an example of egregious abuse of the single-judge division system.

Then, on Tuesday, the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) ** sent ([link removed])
a letter to Senate Judiciary Chair Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) stating that the CBC would oppose two judicial nominations if Durbin did not undertake outlined changes to the Jim Crow-era blue slip process.
* ** Blue slips ([link removed])
are blue pieces of paper that the Senate Judiciary Committee uses to survey home-state senators’ views of a district court nominee. Durbin has the power to end this practice as the blue slip process is not mandatory under the U.S. Constitution but instead is a courtesy process. The extent to which a blue slip can halt a nomination is dependent on the committee chair’s policy.

CBC Chair Rep. Steven Horsford (D-Nev.), the primary author of the letter, points to Sen. Chuck Grassley’s (R-Iowa) ** elimination ([link removed]'t%20allow%20the,for%20political%20or%20ideological%20reasons.%E2%80%9D)
of the blue slip process for circuit court judges, which allowed former President Donald Trump to stack the federal judiciary while in office. The letter also illustrates the progress that eliminating blue slips has already had on reshaping federal circuit courts.
Grassley’s 2017 ** elimination ([link removed]'t%20allow%20the,for%20political%20or%20ideological%20reasons.%E2%80%9D)
of the blue slip process for circuit court judges has allowed for some of President Joe Biden’s historic judicial nominations, like ** Nancy Abudu ([link removed])
, to be confirmed. Nominations like Abudu’s, Horsford argues, are necessary in the pursuit of “diversify[ing] the judiciary, protect[ing] critical civil rights and liberties, and reestablish[ing] fair courts with ideological balance.”

Trump Lawyers, Including John Eastman, Face Jan. 6 Consequences

This summer, the legal architects of Jan. 6 and Trump’s futile attempts to overturn the 2020 presidential results have been facing long overdue ** consequences ([link removed])
for their role in subverting our constitution.

In California, John Eastman’s disbarment proceedings have begun. Utilizing the now-rejected ** independent state legislature theory ([link removed])
, Eastman claimed that former Vice President Mike Pence could reject Electoral College votes and later asked to be on Trump's "pardon list" after Jan. 6.

This week, a D.C.-based bar disciplinary committee recommended that Rudy Giuliani also face disbarment proceedings. And in Georgia, Lin Wood’s request to permanently retire, instead of possibly face disbarment, was granted.

Eastman, Giuliani and Wood were all critical members of Trump’s legal team and its efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election.

More News
* In a major victory for voters, a Nevada judge ** denied ([link removed])
the Nevada Republican Party’s (NV GOP) request to block a state law mandating parties to hold primaries for the 2024 presidential election. The court rejected the NV GOP’s blatant attempt to rewrite the state’s election law and disregard voters’ preferences.
* In a lawsuit challenging Louisiana’s congressional map, the secretary of state and attorney general ** argued ([link removed])
in a new filing that the case should go back to the trial court to address whether Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act is "no longer necessary" in light of the U.S. Supreme Court's recent affirmative action decision.
* In Florida, a federal court ** dismissed ([link removed])
a lawsuit brought by the League of Women Voters of Florida and the Florida State Conference of the NAACP alleging that Florida’s voter registration applications lack federally required information about voter eligibility for those with post-felony convictions. The voting groups now have 14 days to file an amended complaint to continue the case.
* Also in Florida, a federal judge ** declined ([link removed])
to temporarily block two provisions of the state’s recently enacted voter suppression law, Senate Bill 7050. One provision prohibits individuals with certain felony convictions from handling voter registration applications and the other requires third-party voter registration organizations to provide a receipt to each voter registration applicant containing identifying information, including their full name. However, just last week, the same judge ** blocked ([link removed])
two other provisions of the law in a win for Florida voters.
* The Public Interest Legal Foundation (PILF), a right-wing legal group, ** filed ([link removed])
a lawsuit challenging a North Dakota law that allows the counting of mail-in ballots that are postmarked by Election Day and received by officials up to 13 days later. PILF argues that this statute violates federal law.

OPINION: As the House Slashes Funding for State and Local Election Departments, the Senate Should Do Better
** Red background with blue-toned image of someone dumping out coins from a piggy bank that says "Ballot Box" on it ([link removed])

By Tiana Epps-Johnson, the executive director of the Center for Tech and Civic Life, a nonpartisan nonprofit dedicated to connecting Americans with the information they need to become and remain civically engaged. ** Read more ([link removed])
➡️
What We're Doing

We are ** reading ProPublica ([link removed])
’s research on right-wing activists’ challenges to voter registrations in Georgia — nearly 100,000 challenges filed and most of those by just six people — that have left voters ** feeling harassed and intimidated ([link removed])
. The onslaught of registration challenges has come after changes to the state’s election law. This is a devastating moment for democracy as tens of thousands of Georgians could potentially be at risk of disenfranchisement.

Also, early voting started this week for Ohio’s ** special election ([link removed])
on Aug. 8. Ohioans are voting on a constitutional amendment that would make it harder for citizen-led ballot measures to succeed. Early voting ** continues ([link removed])
through Aug. 6.
* The special election is a reminder of how powerful your vote actually is. It is also a good reminder that there are no off years and there is no better time than the present to update your voter registration. Check ** here ([link removed])
to find out how you update voter registration in your state.

** ([link removed])

SUMMER IS HERE

The fight for voting rights
is heating up.

Stay cool this summer with our merch!

** SHOP NOW ([link removed])

There’s no new episode of our podcast, Defending Democracy, this week. It’s the perfect time to catch up on our previous episodes. Listen on Apple, Spotify or wherever you get your podcasts.
** Democracy Docket Twitter ([link removed])
** Democracy Docket Website (democracydocket.com)
** Democracy Docket Instagram ([link removed])
** Democracy Docket Facebook ([link removed])
** Defending Democracy Podcast ([link removed])
We depend on the support of our readers to keep bringing you the latest on the fight for democracy. You can help ** keep our content free ([link removed])
and available for all today. Want to change how you receive these emails? You can ** update your preferences ([link removed])
or ** unsubscribe from this list ([link removed])
.

Copyright © 2023 Democracy Docket, All rights reserved.

Our mailing address is:
250 Massachusetts Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20001