NAACP to Intervene In Texas' Voting-Rights Case

U.S. Justice Department Objects To Lone Star State's Voter ID Law; U.S. District Court is the Next Step

By Frederick H. Lowe
Arguing that the Texas Voter Identification Law would disenfranchise large numbers of nonwhite voters, two organizations announced on Monday that they would intervene to stop a restrictive photo ID law and to defend the Voting Rights Act.

The Texas State Conference of the NAACP and the Mexican American Legislative Caucus of the Texas House of Representatives (MALC) alleged that the law erects barriers to voting and disenfranchises hundreds of thousands of nonwhite voters in violation of Section 5 of the 1965 Voting Rights Act. It prohibits states from imposing any “voting qualification or prerequisite to voting, or standard, practice, or procedure that denies the right of any citizen of the United States to vote on account of race or color.”

Texas is one of 32 states with Republican legislatures and Republican governors that have enacted laws requiring residents to show a state-issued photo ID or an ID in order to vote. Texas' voter ID requirement was Senate Bill (S.B.) 14, which was signed into law on May 27, 2011, by Texas Gov. Rick Perry.

The two groups announced their intentions on Monday, the same day the U.S. Justice Department said it objected to Texas’ voter ID law on grounds that it would have a discriminatory effect on minority voters.

In a March 12, six-page letter to Texas Elections Director Keith Ingram, Assistant U.S. Attorney General Thomas E. Perez wrote that Texas did not meet the burden of proof that the voter ID law proof would not have a discriminatory effect on voters. 

“According to the state's own data, a Hispanic registered voter is at least 46.5 percent, and potentially 120 percent more likely than a non-Hispanic voter to lack the required identification,” Perez said.

Residents who don't have state-issued voter identification card would have to travel to a department of motor vehicles facility to obtain an identification card. According to Perez, 7.3 percent of Hispanic households don't have access to a vehicle, compared with 3.8 percent of whites. In addition, 81 of Texas' 254 counties don't have DMV offices.

Perez noted that Texas has not provided data on whether African-American or Asian-registered voters also were disproportionately affected by S.B. 14.

Texas’ total voting age population was 18, 279, 737 million based on the 2010 U.S. Census. Of that number, 6,143, 144 million or 33.6 percent were Hispanic; 2,102,474 million or 11.5 percent were African American; 758,636 or 4.2 percent were Asian; and 9, 074,684 million or 49.6 percent were Angelo. White voters are in the minority.

In order for Texas residents to obtain a state-issued voter ID card, they would be required to produce two pieces of secondary identification or one piece of secondary identification and two supporting documents. If the voter does not possess any of these documents, the least expensive option will be to spend $22 on a copy of the voter’s birth certificate.  “The legislature tabled amendments that would have prohibited  state agencies from charging for any underlying documents needed to obtain an acceptable form of  photo identification,”  Perez wrote.

In its brief, Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott argued that Texas' voter ID law would not have the effect of “denying or abridging the right to vote on account of race or color.”

The Justice Department's decision sets the stage for a court hearing. Both Texas and South Carolina, which also enacted a voter ID law, said they would appeal the decision to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. The Justice Department blocked South Carolina's voter ID law in December.

Texas and South Carolina are required to have any changes to their voting laws cleared by the U.S. Justice Department under Section 5 of the 1965 Voting Rights Act because both states have a history of installing obstacles to prevent blacks and Hispanics from voting.

The applicants motion to intervene also includes the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University Law School, NAACP National Headquarters; Dechert LLP, a law firm based in Princeton, N.J., the Law Office of Jose Garza in San Antonio, Tex., the Law Office of Robert Notzon in Austin, Tex., and Gary L. Bledsoe & Associates, also in Austin.