On The Docket 09/10/2021

As you may have heard, we launched our new website this week. It’s been in the works for a while, and our platform expands at a time that could not be more important for the future of voting rights. Thank you for joining us in the fight and staying in the loop about all things democracy, and be sure to poke around the new site.
[link removed]
(Also, be sure to check out our merchandise store!) [link removed]

— Team Democracy Docket

IN THE NATION’S CAPITAL

The U.S. Senate will return from August recess next week with voting rights legislation on the top of its agenda. The U.S. House of Representatives returns the following week, although reconvened earlier in August to pass the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act, H.R. 4. Read our Explainer, “The John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act Explained,” to learn what the landmark bill named after the late Georgia representative would do, how it differs from other federal legislation and its path to passage.
[link removed]

IN THE STATES
Democratic Legislators Expand Voter Access While Republicans Attack It

Texas — On Tuesday morning, Texas Governor Greg Abbott (R) signed Senate Bill 1 into law. Republicans in the state Legislature passed the omnibus voter suppression bill last week during a special session. Texas Republicans finally achieved their goal of enacting a law that limits almost every method of voting in the state. When Democratic lawmakers stymied efforts to pass the bill in the regular session, Gov. Abbott called two special sessions during the summer. Tuesday’s signing ceremony took place in Tyler, a city in the district of Sen. Bryan Hughes (R), the original author of S.B. 1. “We must have trust and confidence in our elections. The bill that I am about to sign achieves that goal,” Abbott said during the press conference. “The law does, however, make it harder for fraudulent votes to be cast.” Lieutenant Gov. Dan Patrick (R) praised the Legislature’s work during the special sessions, calling S.B. 1 one of the “four cornerstones of conservative policies” passed in recent weeks. Abbott and the bill sponsors reiterated claims that new provisions are needed to prevent fraud, despite the lack of evidence of widespread fraud in Texas during last year’s election.
[link removed]

California — On Sept. 2, California Democrats moved one step closer to overhauling their state’s vote-by-mail procedures. The state Senate passed Assembly Bill 37, ensuring all registered voters receive a mail-in ballot at least 29 days before every election. During the 2020 election cycle, numerous states altered their mail-in voting policies, but California took the proactive measure of sending a mail-in ballot to all registered voters, even if they did not request one. Consequently, 71% of eligible voters in the Golden State cast ballots in 2020, the highest turnout since 1952, according to the California secretary of state’s office. A.B. 37 also requires a tracking system and mandates a certain number of drop boxes based on county population. "Our democracy is strongest when everyone participates,” said Assemblymember Marc Berman (D), when he indicated his intent to make permanent the successful 2020 reforms. The California Assembly passed an earlier version of A.B. 37, but will vote one more time on the updated proposal before sending it to the desk of Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) to sign it into law.
[link removed]


IN THE COURTS
An Onslaught of Lawsuits for Texas

Texas — Five lawsuits have been filed challenging Texas’ newly-enacted voter suppression law, S.B 1. The first four were filed in federal court, whereas the fifth was filed in state court. Two cases were filed last Friday before the bill was signed into law, and minutes after Gov. Abbott signed S.B. 1, a third lawsuit challenged the bill’s most disenfranchising provisions. This complaint, filed by LULAC Texas, Voto Latino, Texas Alliance for Retired Americans and Texas AFT, alleges that the new law imposes an undue burden on the right to vote in violation of the First and 14th Amendments, purposely intends to limit minority voters’ access to the ballot box in violation of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act (VRA) and disproportionately impacts voters with disabilities and limited-language proficiencies in violation of Section 208 of the VRA. The suit asks the court to prohibit the suppressive provisions from being enforced. The provisions challenged in this lawsuit include: criminalizing public officials’ efforts to encourage the submission of absentee ballot applications; additional ID requirements for absentee voting; the effective elimination of drop boxes, drive-thru voting and 24-hour early voting; new obstacles for voters to receive assistance to vote absentee or in person; and the empowerment of partisan poll watchers.
[link removed]

A fourth lawsuit was filed shortly after on behalf of the Houston Area Urban League, Houston Justice, Delta Sigma Theta Sorority, Inc., The Arc of Texas and an individual voter. The plaintiffs allege that S.B. 1’s “burdens will be disproportionately borne by Black and Latino voters and voters with disabilities” and therefore argue that the law violates the First, 14th and 15th Amendments as well as the VRA, the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. A fifth lawsuit, and the first filed in state court, was filed on behalf of the Texas State Conference of the NAACP, Common Cause Texas, various election officials and an individual voter. The complaint argues that certain restrictions violate multiple provisions of the Texas Constitution because they were enacted with discriminatory intent and burden the right to vote for all Texas voters, but particularly voters of color. For updates on all lawsuits, check out our active cases page for Texas here. [link removed]

And More:
The voting rights world did not take a vacation this summer. As Republicans passed restrictive voting laws and states began the decennial redistricting process, courts handed down significant decisions that reshaped access to the ballot box. Read our latest article, “A Round-Up of This Summer’s Voting Rights Litigation” for litigation highlights from this summer that you may have missed.
[link removed]
An improbable recall campaign has turned into a legitimate challenge to California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D). Why is the incumbent governor facing an election before the end of his term? How is this possible? In today’s Explainer, “What Is a Recall Election?” we answer all your questions about recall elections and outline what’s at stake for the most populous state in the nation.
[link removed]

WHAT WE’RE DOING
Three things to do today to stay engaged in the fight!

We’re taking action: On September 14, California’s governorship is on the line. If you’re in California, start talking to friends and neighbors about the upcoming recall election. Remind them to send back their ballots and vote NO on Question 1 to ensure the state stays blue. Visit stoptherepublicanrecall.com to learn how to help from across the country.
[link removed]

We’re reading: Did you hear that Democracy Docket launched a new website? Our revamped Cases page is the go-to place for all voting rights litigation. You can use filters to find out what cases are happening in your state or sort by topic — so spend some time exploring!
[link removed]

We’re watching: The Sentencing Project is hosting a special discussion on Sept. 15 at 2 p.m. ET to kick off National Voting Rights Month. Register here for the webinar on the intersection between felony disenfranchisement laws and voter suppression.
[link removed]

SPOTLIGHT
Working Toward Full Suffrage

In this week’s Spotlight, award-winning artist and activist John Legend argues for the moral and democratic necessity of universal suffrage. Currently, over 5 million citizens in this country — roughly 75% of whom are living in their communities and 25% serving sentences behind bars — can’t vote because of a felony conviction. Legend examines the ties between the racist history of felony disenfranchisement laws and the unequal application of criminal law. He outlines the harm these restrictions can do to individuals, their communities and our country at large. “The loss of voting rights, and with it, the essence of our American citizenship, is no small thing,” writes Legend. Read “Working Toward Full Suffrage” on Democracy Docket now.
[link removed]

ASK MARC

Each week, we pick a few reader questions about all things elections and share Marc’s answers. Got a question? Submit it here! [link removed]

Jennifer asks: What can large corporations do to help the nation?

Marc: There is a lot that corporate America could do to help our democracy. They can start by turning off campaign contributions to Republicans who oppose voting rights. They can spend money to lobby against bad voting bills and for important legislation like the For the People Act. They can also use their knowledge to help solve some of the problems citizens face when voting.

Rachel asks: Do you expect that the Supreme Court would be as hostile to voting rights as they have been to abortion rights?

Marc: I don’t have rose-colored glasses, I know the current composition of the Supreme Court. But what choice do we have? When the political branch has failed to protect people’s constitutional rights, we must turn to the courts. While we hope Congress will step in and pass For the People and the John Lewis VRAA, it is the job of federal and state courts in this country to ensure that constitutional rights are protected. We are going to litigate these cases assuming the courts will do the right thing.

WHAT BODE’S BARKING ABOUT

“Though the two laws address different domains, they are connected: in Texas and elsewhere in the country, a ligature of racism connects efforts to deny people of color their right to vote and women — disproportionately women of color — their right to terminate a pregnancy.” The New Yorker [link removed]

“Texas has persuaded many companies to relocate or expand operations there with its business-friendly policies. But in taking a stand on voting rights, some companies have invited scrutiny of their words and actions, especially with political donations. Balancing this against the tightening of some of the country’s strictest voting rules will test companies’ social pledges with financial imperatives.” The New York Times [link removed]

“In Democratic-controlled Colorado, Virginia and Oregon, new congressional maps drawn by commissions or bipartisan power-sharing agreements are unlikely to give the party the sort of political advantages it could have otherwise enjoyed. Republicans, meanwhile, haven’t given up their power, controlling the process in 20 states, including Florida, Texas and North Carolina.” AP [link removed]



Democracy Docket is the leading progressive media platform dedicated to providing information, opinion and analysis about voting rights, elections, redistricting and democracy.

Like getting our exclusive updates on all things democracy? We depend on the support of our readers to keep bringing you the latest on the fight for democracy. We can’t do this without you.

Support our work today! [[link removed]]

Email is the best way to keep in touch, but click here to unsubscribe: [link removed] .

Democracy Docket
PO Box 733
Great Falls, VA 22066
United States

Follow us on social:

[[link removed]]
[link removed]]
[[link removed]]
[[link removed]]