US voting rights

Subterms

    More stories

    • 138 Shares119 Views

      in US Politics

      DoJ sues Arizona over voting law that requires proof of citizenship

      by

      DoJ sues Arizona over voting law that requires proof of citizenshipMeasure signed by Republican governor in March a ‘textbook violation’ of law designed to protect voters, department says The Department of Justice is challenging a new Arizona law that requires voters to provide proof of citizenship for presidential elections, among other new restrictions, saying the measure was a “textbook violation” of a federal law meant to protect voters.The challenged Arizona measure, HB 2492, was signed into law by the Republican governor, Doug Ducey, in March, requires anyone who wants to vote in a presidential election, or vote by mail in any election, to provide proof of citizenship.Next up: voting rights, as US supreme court set to tear up more protectionsRead moreThe law was among several pushed by the Arizona legislature following the 2020 election in a state where Donald Trump and his allies have spread baseless claims of fraud. Voting by mail is widely used in Arizona, a key battleground state, and Republicans in the state have made numerous attempts to make it harder to cast a ballot that way.In 2013, the supreme court ruled 7-2 in a case called Arizona v Inter Tribal Council of Arizona that the state could not require anyone who used the federal government’s voter registration application to provide proof of citizenship when they registered.As a result of that decision, there are tens of thousands of voters in Arizona who are only allowed to vote in federal elections, not state contests, because they have not provided proof of citizenship. As of March, there were roughly 31,500 federal-only voters in the state.Arizona lawmakers said that the decision only applied to congressional elections, not presidential ones, even though a lawyer for the legislature advised them the measure was probably illegal. A 1993 law, the National Voter Registration Act, requires all states to accept a federal form for voter registration – the form does not require proof of citizenship, but asks voters to attest under penalty of perjury that they are citizens.“House Bill 2492’s onerous documentary proof of citizenship requirement for certain federal elections constitutes a textbook violation of the National Voter Registration Act,” Kristen Clarke, who leads the justice department’s civil rights division said on Tuesday. “Arizona is a repeat offender when it comes to attempts to make it harder to register to vote. HB 2492 is in direct with the 2013 US supreme court decision.”Some see the law as a blatant effort to get the US supreme court to reconsider its 2013 decision. The court has become significantly more conservative since then; three of the justices who were in the majority in that case – Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy, and Ruth Bader Ginsburg – have been replaced with more conservative justices. Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented in 2013, saying they believed Arizona could require proof of citizenship for those who use the federal form.The court’s new conservative majority has shown a blunt hostility to voting access, siding with state lawmakers and upholding nearly every voting restriction that has come before it in recent years.Arizona’s attorney general, Mark Brnovich, vowed on Friday that he would continue to defend the law. “Please be assured I will defend this law to the US supreme court if necessary and defeat the federal government’s efforts to interfere with our state’s election safeguards,” Brnovich, a Republican running for US Senate, wrote in a letter to Clarke.The justice department is also challenging other provisions of the Arizona law. The measure also required Arizona to add a section to its own state registration form asking voters to provide their place of birth. It also instructs election officials not to accept a voter registration form if the voter forgets to check the box indicating they are a US citizen. Those requirements violate the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which makes it illegal to reject someone’s voter registration if they fail to provide information that is immaterial to their eligibility to vote, Clarke said.“Checking this box is not material to establishing the voting qualifications of applicants who have already proven that they are US citizens,” she said. “That information is not material to establishing whether a voter is a US citizen because of naturalization an expatriation patterns among other reasons.”TopicsUS newsThe fight to voteArizonaUS voting rightsUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

    • 138 Shares109 Views

      in US Politics

      Republican party building an ‘army’ to overturn election results – report

      by

      Republican party building an ‘army’ to overturn election results – reportAlleged scheme include installing volunteers as poll workers and getting attorneys who could intervene to block votes, Politico says The Republican party is building a grassroots “army” to target and potentially overturn election results in Democratic precincts, the Politico website reported on Wednesday, citing video evidence.The alleged scheme includes installing party-trained volunteers prepared to challenge voters at Democratic-majority polling places, creating a website to put these workers in touch with local lawyers and establishing a network of district attorneys who could intervene to block vote counts.Many Republicans still believe Donald Trump’s lie that he lost the 2020 election to Joe Biden because of widespread voter fraud. At state level the party has passed laws that make it harder to vote while pro-Trump candidates are running for positions that would give them control over future elections.Politico obtained a series of recordings of Republican meetings between the summer of 2021 and May this year.It said one from November shows Matthew Seifried, the Republican National Committee’s (RNC) election integrity director for Michigan, urging party activists in Wayne county to obtain official designations as poll workers.Seifried says: “Being a poll worker, you just have so many more rights and things you can do to stop something than [as] a poll challenger.”Some of the would-be poll workers complain that fraud was committed in 2020 and that the election was “corrupt”.At another training session last October, Seifried promises support for such workers: “It’s going to be an army. We’re going to have more lawyers than we’ve ever recruited, because let’s be honest, that’s where it’s going to be fought, right?”Politico also obtained Zoom tapings of Tim Griffin, legal counsel to the Amistad Project, a self-described election integrity group that Trump’s former lawyer Rudy Giuliani once portrayed as a “partner” in the Trump campaign’s legal efforts to overturn the 2020 election.Griffin is seen meeting with activists from multiple states and discussing plans for identifying friendly district attorneys who could stage interventions in local election disputes.He says during one meeting in September: “Remember, guys, we’re trying to build out a nationwide district attorney network. Your local district attorney, as we always say, is more powerful than your congressman.“They’re the ones that can seat a grand jury. They’re the ones that can start an investigation, issue subpoenas, make sure that records are retained, etc.”Politico added that installing party loyalists on the board of canvassers, which is responsible for certifying election results, also appears to be part of the Republican strategy.The revelations are sure to intensify concerns about fresh assaults on American democracy in 2022 and 2024.Nick Penniman, founder and chief executive of Issue One, an election watchdog group, told Politico: “This is completely unprecedented in the history of American elections – that a political party would be working at this granular level to put a network together. It looks like now the Trump forces are going directly after the legal system itself, and that should concern everyone.”The RNC insisted that it is simply trying to restore balance to election oversight in heavily Democratic cities such as Detroit. Gates McGavick, an RNC spokesperson, was quoted as saying: “Democrats have had a monopoly on poll watching for 40 years, and it speaks volumes that they’re terrified of an even playing field.“The RNC is focused on training volunteers to take part in the election process because polling shows that American voters want bipartisan poll-watching to ensure transparency and security at the ballot box.”TopicsRepublicansUS elections 2024US politicsUS voting rightsnewsReuse this content More

    • 263 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Crystal Mason on a ruling that could change her life: 'I know this is not over’ | The fight to vote

      by

      Crystal Mason on a ruling that could change her life: ‘I know this is not over’ A court in Texas must reconsider its decision to sentence Mason to five years for a voting error – how does she feel?Hello Fight to Vote readers,Every Tuesday night for the last year or so, Crystal Mason has had trouble sleeping.On Wednesday mornings, the Texas court of criminal appeals, the state’s highest criminal court, usually issues its ruling. And since March of last year, Mason has been waiting for a ruling from the court that could change her life. She’s been appealing a five-year prison sentence for voting a provisional ballot in 2016. Mason was ineligible to vote at the time because she was on federal supervised release – which is like probation – for a tax felony. Texas prohibits anyone from voting while they are serving a criminal sentence, but she says – and probation officials have confirmed – that no one told her she was ineligible.Yesterday, Mason, who is 47-years-old and raised seven kids and has six grandchildren, got the phone call she’s been anxiously waiting for. In an 8-1 ruling, the court told a lower court it had to reconsider the case to determine whether Mason actually knew she was ineligible to vote when she cast a ballot. It was a partial, but far from final, victory for Mason.I’ve been following Mason’s case for the last few years, and on Wednesday, I spoke with Mason hours after the ruling. We talked about about her case and why she thinks it’s struck a nerve across the US.How are you feeling, and what was it like to get the news this morning?I was at work and Kim [Mason’s lawyer] called me … She said the decision came in. I just started to panic, I started to sweat, like nervous, like, ‘What’s going on, Kim?’She let me know that it’s going back to the second court of appeals and they have to prove intent. Like where I really knew that I was committing a crime. And I feel like that’s a good step. That’s a good step right there.If you go off facts and facts alone, Sam, you know that the supervised release officer testified on the stand and said no one told me [I couldn’t vote] in the supervised release office. Then I received paperwork in my judgment and commitment, and in black and white, it’s not there. And then you can see it in my supervised release information, it was not there.Texas court ordered to reconsider decision to uphold prison sentence for woman who votedRead moreI think that the criminal court of appeals asked them something very important. That needs to be … that’s the whole case, right there. I’m very happy that they did that. But I know this is not over.You were never told, never had any idea, being on federal supervised release, that you couldn’t vote in Texas?Absolutely not. I was never told that. I never had any paperwork stating that. I was going by all my conditions of being on supervised release, and I did not see that at all. I do know that as a felon you still have the right to vote. I had no idea that being on supervised release took that right away from me.There’s no way … I’m on track. I got a good job. I’m making decent money. I’m in school. I’m back with my family, my kids, my grandbabies. You wouldn’t have ever taken a chance, if there was even a grey line, of me thinking that I was ineligible to vote. I just wouldn’t have did that. You just don’t.This has been a disaster for me. The jobs that I have lost. Me going back to prison [Mason was ordered to return to federal prison for 10 months for being convicted of a crime while on supervised release], leaving my kids. Me fighting to try to maintain everything. It’s been a disaster for me.There have been very significant consequences for you and your family. Can you walk me through what some of those consequences have been?I had to go back to prison. I had three jobs taken away from me. I fought to maintain my house and everything. And I am the provider for my family.You were not a political person in 2016.Not at all.And since then you’ve become political. Can you tell me a little bit about what you’ve been doing and what made you get more politically active?If you go back to my first interviews, you’ll hear me say ‘I’ll never vote again. I’ll never vote again.’ And that was it. And I realized that’s exactly what they wanted me to do. That’s exactly what they wanted me to say.I realized that no, I have to let everybody know that what I had done was an innocent mistake. And I am being prosecuted for an innocent mistake and that is not right. And then I had to let everybody know how important it is to go vote. Because the people that did this to me – the judge, the DA, the prosecutor – they’re all elected officials. So this is the reason why it’s so important that we get out and vote.And what has your group, Crystal Mason ‘The Fight’, been focused on? Has it been teaching people about their rights eligibility? Encouraging them to vote? All of the above?All of the above. Educating them on the different types of ballot. We’re getting ready to do a town hall. And that’s where we’re asking different candidates running for different positions to come to my venue and speak to the community. And let us know: who you are and what do you plan on doing if you get the seat you’re running for.I’ve traveled across the country, and almost everywhere I go, people have heard of that woman in Texas who was sentenced to five years in prison for trying to vote. I’m curious why you think your case has resonated so much and caused so much outrage?I think the people see the wrongness. The people that’s in the court system, the people that’s in a position to do something about it has turned a blind eye on it. I feel that people who hear the story and just really see, they know that I did nothing wrong. I did nothing wrong. Nothing at all.I filled out a provisional ballot. I’m being sentenced for illegally voting and I never voted. I mean that’s wrong right there.There are some people who have said your case is an example of intimidation. Sending a message to Black people, and people who have felony convictions in their past, that you better be really sure you can vote before you try. Do you see it as intimidation? Have you heard from other people who are not going to vote because they heard about what’s happened to you?I have heard that. That’s because people are scared. They’re listening to me, and I tell them ‘yep, I’m right here but I’m fighting and it’s very wrong.’ But people don’t want to take a chance.And yes, I do feel like my case is sending a message to the Black and the brown [people]: ‘If you dare come to the polls, this could happen to you’. So yes, I do feel like it’s sending a message. It is a scare tactic. And that’s not right, that’s not right at all. So that’s the reason I’m out here speaking to people and telling people how important it is to vote.And actually you voted in the primary, a couple months ago [Mason’s supervised release expired last year, allowing her to vote in Texas]. What was that like for you to go back to the voting booth and cast a ballot when you were eligible?It was very exciting. I was with my family, and the things that I didn’t know [before], I knew. So once I finished up with my ballot, I automatically went to go help my mother. And of course I got stopped and they said, ‘Oh no, you can’t.’I told her … I can help her. I had to fill out a form, and they notarized it and everything. I turned around and I went to help my mom and I helped my niece. So I felt real good about being knowledgable about being able to help them through that ballot.Is there anything you hope people take away from your case? What do you hope people will learn from your case and take away from it.The importance of voting. Everybody that has something to do with my case are elected officials.TopicsUS newsFight to voteTexasUS politicsUS voting rightsfeaturesReuse this content More

    • 175 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      Texas court ordered to reconsider decision to uphold prison sentence for woman who voted

      by

      Texas court ordered to reconsider decision to uphold prison sentence for woman who votedCrystal Mason was sentenced to five years in prison for casting a provisional ballot in the 2016 election A Texas appeals court must reconsider its decision to uphold a five-year conviction for Crystal Mason, the Texas woman sentenced to prison for casting a provisional ballot in the 2016 election, the state’s highest criminal court ruled on Wednesday.My day with Pamela Moses after her charges were dropped | The fight to voteRead moreMason showed up to the polls to vote in 2016, while on supervised release – which is similar to probation – for a federal tax felony. She cast a provisional ballot at the urging of election workers, which was ultimately rejected because people with felony convictions in Texas cannot vote while they are serving any part of a federal sentence.Mason said she had no idea she was ineligible to vote, and an official from the federal probation office testified at her trial that they never informed her she was ineligible. “That’s just not something we do. In my opinion, that’s common knowledge, but that’s not something we do,” the official said during her trial.A local judge in Tarrant county, where Mason lives, convicted her of illegally voting in 2018 and sentenced her to five years in prison. An appeals court upheld that ruling in 2020.The Texas court of criminal appeals said the an appellate court had “erred by failing to require proof that the appellant had actual knowledge that it was a crime for her to vote while on supervised release”.Mason has remained out of prison on an appeal bond during that time. Her appeal to the Texas court of criminal appeals, Texas’s highest criminal court, was her last chance.“I am pleased that the court acknowledged issues with my conviction, and am ready to defend myself against these cruel charges,” Mason said in a statement. “My life has been upended for what was, at worst, an innocent misunderstanding of casting a provisional ballot that was never even counted. I have been called to this fight for voting rights and will continue to serve my community.”Anna Tinsley Williams, a spokeswoman for Tarrant County district attorney Sharen Wilson, declined to comment on the ruling because it was a pending case.The case attracted significant national attention because of the severity of Mason’s sentence. It’s one of a string of cases in which Black defendants have faced harsh punishments for voting errors, in what many see as an obvious effort to intimidate Black voters. There is no comprehensive data comparing punishment for voting crimes by race.Even though Mason will remain out of prison, the case has already taken a significant toll on her life. She lost her job after she was indicted for illegally voting, and was sent back to federal prison for several months for being charged with a crime on supervised release. She nearly lost her home to foreclosure during that time as her teenage children stepped in to run the household.In recent years, she has become much more politically active, encouraging people to vote and learn about their eligibility if they have a felony conviction. She introduced Beto O’Rourke onstage in March when he formally earned the Democratic nomination for Texas governor.During her trial, prosecutors argued Mason knew she was ineligible to vote because witnesses testified that she read and signed an affidavit on the provisional ballot stating the voting eligibility requirements. And when the second court of appeals upheld her sentence in 2020, the court said the fact that Mason didn’t know she was ineligible was “irrelevant to her prosecution”. All prosecutors needed to prove was that she knew she was on federal supervised release, Judge Wade Birdwell wrote for the court.The Texas court of appeals said Wednesday that interpretation of the law was incorrect and “would lead to absurd consequences that the legislature could not possibly have intended”.“The state was required to prove not only that Appellant knew she was on supervised release but also that she ‘actually realized’ that ‘these circumstances … in fact’ rendered her ineligible to vote,” Judge Jesse McClure III, wrote for the 8-1 majority.“The court of criminal appeals clarifying that innocent mistakes cannot be the basis for prosecution is critical,” said Thomas Buser-Clancy, a lawyer with the Texas chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union, who is helping represent Mason. “We are hopeful that holding, as we go back to the lower court, will ensure that what was at worst an innocent mistake for Ms. Mason will lead to overturning her conviction.”The court rejected two other arguments offered by Mason’s lawyers in the appeal. They disagreed with an argument that because Mason’s ballot was rejected, she did not actually “vote” under the law. They also rejected an argument that her conviction should be overturned because federal law guarantees her the right to vote a provisional ballot. There were nearly 4,000 provisional ballots rejected in Tarrant county in the 2016 election. Mason appears to be the only person among them who was prosecuted.In a dissenting opinion, Judge Michelle Slaughter wrote that there was enough evidence that Mason knew she was ineligible to vote to convict her. After her federal conviction, she noted, the local election office sent two notices to her home address telling her she was ineligible to vote. Even though Mason was in federal prison at that time, Slaughter said, it was reasonable to infer Mason’s family either forwarded her the letter or that she read them when she returned home years later. (Mason has said she never saw the notices.) She also said the fact that Mason signed the provisional affidavit only corroborated that she knew she was ineligible.TopicsTexasThe fight to voteUS politicsUS voting rightsnewsReuse this content More

    • 188 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Georgia sees first major test for a Republican defending democracy | The fight to vote

      by

      Georgia sees first major test for a Republican defending democracyThe most important primary in the US might be the Georgia secretary of state race, where Brad Raffensperger is in a tough re-election battle after standing up to Trump Get the latest updates on voting rights in the Guardian’s Fight to vote newsletterHello, and Happy Thursday,I’m writing from Atlanta, where I’m spending this week reporting on the Republican primary for secretary of state.This race is perhaps the most important primary happening in America this year. Brad Raffensperger, Georgia’s incumbent secretary of state, is in a really tough re-election battle after memorably standing up to Donald Trump in 2020 and refusing his request to “find 11,780 votes” to overturn the election 2020 results. The former president is backing Jody Hice, a conservative congressman who has embraced the myth the election was stolen in a bid to oust Raffensperger.It’s the first major test we’re seeing this year of whether a Republican who defends democracy can withstand the wrath of his own party. It’s also a major test for democracy both in Georgia and the US – one of several closely watched races this year in which candidates who have expressed willingness to overturn an election are seeking to be the chief election officials in their state.I spent Monday morning in a conference room at the headquarters of Georgia Public Broadcasting, watching a live stream of Raffensperger, Hice and two other candidates – David Belle Isle and TJ Hudson – debate downstairs (reporters were not allowed in the room). Nearly the entire hour was about the 2020 election, with the other three candidates repeating baseless and debunked claims of fraud. The first question Hice was asked was why voters should trust his judgment if he continues to believe the election was stolen. He dodged.“The big lie in all of this is that there were no problems in this last election. This last election was filled with problems,” Hice said. “Election security must be protected and Brad Raffensperger let that ball majorly fall.”Afterwards, I asked Hice something I’ve been asking almost everyone I meet who believes the 2020 election was stolen: is there anything he could see that could convince him that it was accurate. The election results in Georgia have been confirmed through multiple audits and recounts.“Not at this point, there’s nothing,” he said, going on to reference an allegation of illegal ballot harvesting from a conservative group that Raffensperger’s office is currently investigating. “This election was just overwhelmed with fraudulent activity. There’s nothing that can change my opinion of that.”I also asked Hice if he thought Trump’s call to Raffensperger was appropriate. If he was elected, what would he do if a president from his own party called him up and asked him to find votes for him?“Absolutely, there was nothing wrong with that request,” Hice said. “He was not saying go out and ‘find illegal ballots for me’. He was saying look at all the fraud that’s out here. Do your job. Make sure we have legal ballots that are cast, legal ballots that are counted, and had Brad done so, I believe the outcome would have been different.”But the January 2021 call from Trump to Raffensperger was not just a generalized call to investigate suspicious activity. As Trump and his team listed what they saw as irregularities, Raffensperger and his staff said that they were either investigating them or had debunked them. Trump made it clear that he wanted the outcome to be a reversal of the election results. “All I want to do is this. I just want to find 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have because we won the state,” he said.During the debate, Raffensperger pushed back on Hice by repeatedly describing him as a liar while also trying to burnish his own conservative credentials. He repeatedly touted his focus on preventing non-citizen voting – which is virtually non-existent. He said he would be in favor of getting rid of a federal prohibition on giant voter removals within 90 days of an election. And he said he supported getting rid of no-excuse mail-in voting in Georgia. In any other race, all of those would be controversial positions on their own. During the debate on Monday, they seemed moderate in comparison with those of Hice, who refuses to acknowledge the legitimacy of the 2020 election.At one point during the debate, Raffensperger, a former engineer who is soft-spoken and sometimes speaks awkwardly, seemed exasperated. He detailed how his office had played a kind of Whac-A-Mole after the 2020 election, debunking claims about felon voting, underage voting and dead people voting.“The real problem that you have gets down to basic honesty,” he said. “It gets down to, it was actual, total, disinformation, misinformation, outright lying. And there’s not much I can do about that, because Jody Hice has been running from one rumor to another for the last 18 months. And how can you have confidence when people that should be holding a responsible position as a sitting congressman should be telling the truth.”Also worth watching …
      Georgia’s department of driver services quietly eliminated automatic voter registration on its website, but has since restored it.
      A decision striking down New York’s congressional map is a major blow to Democratic efforts to keep control of the US House this year
      Mississippi’s governor vetoed a bill that would make it moderately easier for people with felony convictions to get their voting rights back.
      TopicsGeorgiaFight to voteRepublicansUS politicsUS voting rightsfeaturesReuse this content More

    • 188 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      My day with Pamela Moses after her charges were dropped | The fight to vote

      by

      ‘I’m like Rocky’: my day with Pamela Moses after her charges were droppedAfter prosecutors dropped criminal charges against Moses for trying to register to vote, I met her in person – and learned what’s next now that her case is over Get the latest updates on voting rights in the Guardian’s Fight to vote newsletterHello, and Happy Thursday,I’ve been closely following the criminal case against Pamela Moses, who was sentenced to six years in prison for trying to register to vote, for the last few months. But on Monday I met her in person for the first time.We were meeting just days after prosecutors announced they were dropping criminal charges against her, cancelling a scheduled court appearance where she was set to find out if they would retry her case. Even so, Moses insisted that she take me to visit the hulking criminal courthouse in downtown Memphis, a building simply known by its address, 201 Poplar.We went through security and walked downstairs into one of the courthouse’s main waiting areas, where electronic screens on the wall showed defendant names and where they stood on court dockets for the day. It was mostly empty, but on a normal day, Moses said, it’s crowded with Black people waiting to get their cases heard. She walked past a line of people waiting at a clerk’s office and asked a teller if a judge she knew was still around – he wasn’t.We took the elevator up to the seventh floor, which houses the courtroom where Moses’ case took place. When the doors opened, a sheriff’s deputy beamed, gave her a hug, and congratulated her on beating the case. “This man tried to kill me the first time he met me,” Moses said, laughing. She would later tell me he was one of the officers who took her into custody when the bail in her voting case was abruptly revoked in December. Now, she said, they were cool with each other.Back downstairs we ran into Kenneth Brashier, a lawyer Moses has known for a long time. He was beaming too and congratulated her. “Usually you have a cigar when you take a victory lap,” he told her. Moses said she’d take a victory lap once she changed Tennessee’s law around felon disenfranchisement.It was raining, so Moses and I spent the rest of the day driving around Memphis in her car. Waiting to pick up her son Taj from school, we talked about the case of Crystal Mason, the Texas woman appealing a five-year prison sentence for casting a provisional ballot while ineligible in 2016. Moses was stunned to learn Mason’s vote wasn’t even counted.She walked me through several of the criminal and other legal cases she’s been involved in, rattling off an encyclopedic knowledge of judges, lawyers, and other county officials. She’s outspoken and embraces her reputation as a bit of a troublemaker. “I’m like Rocky Balboa,” she said at one point with a laugh. When I asked her what would come next for her now that the voting case was over, she didn’t miss a beat. “I’m working on getting a man of out of prison who’s been there for 25 years,” she said. In her yard, she still has a sign up from her long shot 2019 mayoral campaign. It was that effort that prompted election officials to start investigating her voting eligibility.Earlier that morning, Moses had held a press conference at the National Civil Rights Museum at the Lorraine motel, where Martin Luther King Jr was assassinated. It was the first time Moses had spoken about her case since the charges were dropped. Taj, 13, a tech whiz, helped set up two iPhones to stream the press conference. “I am so lucky to be here with my mom because I am blessed. Other children are not as fortunate as me to have their parents released and have their charges dropped,” he said.Moses said Tennessee should get rid of the form that people with felonies have to fill out if they want to vote, the document at the center of her case. Tennessee has one of the most confusing and harshest felon disenfranchisement policies in the country – more than 450,000 people, including more than 20% of the Black voting age population, can’t vote because of a felony conviction, according to an estimate by the Sentencing Project. She told me she saw her case as an effort to intimidate Black voters.“When it comes to Black people in the south, whatever we do, if it’s wrong, you’ve got to pay for it,” she said. “If there was a white person and I got treated the way I did, I would be just as upset, but you don’t see white people getting treated like that.”Moses also rebuked Amy Weirich, the district attorney who prosecuted the case. Weirich put out a statement on Friday suggesting Moses bore responsibility for her long sentence because she did not take a plea deal. Moses said the statement showed how the prosecutor was determined to get a conviction: “It showed who she is: arrogant, wants to be right. I think it just sounded like she wanted to win.” A Weirich spokesman declined an interview request.Moses urged people to vote in the Democratic primary for district attorney, which is going on right now (two of the candidates, Linda Harris and Janika White, watched from the audience). Afterwards, during a lunch at a barbecue restaurant across the street, Moses encouraged other Tennessee voters to talk to Harris.At the press conference that morning, she mentioned that she had considered committing suicide while she was in jail last year. Later she told me it was connected to the shock of being abruptly taken into custody.“Going to jail is not a bad thing for somebody who’s been before. It’s a bad thing when you’re not expecting it,” she said.Snacking on a steady stream of Jolly Ranchers from her front cupholder as we drove around that afternoon, she pointed out what she sees as deep inequalities in Memphis. Near Graceland, we drove by what looked like a busy voting precinct. People vote there, she said, because there’s money and tourism. Further down the road, Moses pointed out the neighborhood had changed: many of the buildings were abandoned, a consequence, she said, of white flight.“There’s so many things wrong in Memphis,” Moses said. “How dare you waste our tax dollars, waste our time, waste our manpower, how dare you do that? That’s what most people can agree on.”Also worth watching …
      Florida Republicans approved a congressional map that severely blunts Black political power in the state. There is already a legal challenge to the plan.
      The Florida governor, Ron DeSantis, approved a new law that creates a statewide office to investigate election crimes and imposes other new restrictions.
      New York’s highest court struck down the state’s congressional map, saying it was too severely distorted to benefit Democrats.
      TopicsUS voting rightsFight to voteMemphisUS politicsfeaturesReuse this content More

    • 125 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      New York court rejects congressional maps, seen as favoring Democrats

      by

      New York court rejects congressional maps, seen as favoring DemocratsLegal fight over process could be a factor in the battle between Democrats and Republicans for control of the House New York’s highest court on Wednesday rejected the state’s new congressional district maps, which had been widely seen as favoring Democrats.The legal fight over New York’s redistricting process could be a factor in the battle between Democrats and Republicans for control of the US House.New York is set to lose one seat in Congress in 2021. New York’s new maps would give Democrats a strong majority of registered voters in 22 of the state’s 26 congressional districts. Republicans now hold eight of the state’s 27 seats.Democrats had been hoping that a redistricting map favorable to their party in New York might help offset expected losses in other states where Republicans control state government.The state’s court of appeals agreed in a ruling with a group of Republican voters who sued, saying that the district boundaries had been unconstitutionally gerrymandered and that the legislature hadn’t followed proper procedure in passing the maps.The court said it will “likely be necessary” to move the congressional and state senate primary elections from June to August.A lower-level court had also ruled that the maps were unconstitutional and had given the legislature a 30 April deadline to come up with new maps or else leave the task to a court-appointed expert.Political district maps across the nation have been redrawn in recent months as a result of population shifts recorded in the 2020 census.Under a process passed by voters in 2014, New York’s new district maps were supposed to have been drawn by an independent commission. But that body, made up of equal numbers of Democrats and Republicans, couldn’t agree on one set of maps. The Democratic-controlled legislature then stepped in and created its own maps, quickly signed into law by Governor Kathy Hochul.Republicans sued, seeking to have the maps tossed for violating a provision in the state constitution barring the redrawing of districts for partisan gain. Similar legal battles have been playing out in several other states.The legal battle has moved quickly through the courts, but not fast enough to quell uncertainty about the primary, now scheduled for 28 June.In the meantime, candidates have had to begin campaigning in the new districts, even as they are unsure whether those districts will still exist by the time voting begins.TopicsNew YorkUS voting rightsDemocratsKathy HochulUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

    • 125 Shares179 Views

      in US Politics

      Ron DeSantis signs bill to create Florida voter-fraud police force

      by

      Ron DeSantis signs bill to create Florida voter-fraud police forceRepublican governor embraces top priority of his party, following Donald Trump’s false claims that his 2020 re-election was stolen Florida governor Ron DeSantis signed a bill Monday to create a police force dedicated to pursuing voter fraud and other election crimes, embracing a top priority of Republicans after Donald Trump’s false claims that his reelection was stolen.DeSantis, who is running for reelection and considered a potential 2024 Republican presidential candidate, made voting legislation a focus this year, pushing the Republican-controlled Legislature to create the policing unit in a speech where he referenced unspecified cases of voter fraud, which have become popular talking points in his party.Twitter agrees Elon Musk takeover dealRead moreVoter fraud is rare, typically occurs in isolated instances and is generally detected. An Associated Press investigation of the 2020 presidential election found fewer than 475 potential cases of voter fraud out of 25.5 million ballots cast in the six states where Trump and his allies disputed his loss to President Joe Biden.Republicans nationwide have stressed the need to restore public confidence in elections and have passed several voting laws in the past two years aimed at placing new rules around mail and early voting methods that were popular in 2020 as the coronavirus pandemic disrupted in-person voting.Florida’s new law, which critics have deemed as politically motivated and unnecessary, comes after DeSantis praised the state’s 2020 election as smooth but later suggested more rules were needed.The law creates an Office of Election Crimes and Security under the Florida Department of State to review fraud allegations and conduct preliminary investigations. DeSantis is required to appoint a group of special officers from the Florida Department of Law Enforcement who would be tasked with pursuing the election law violations.Existing state law allowed the governor to appoint officers to investigate violations of election law but did not require him to do so.The law also increases penalties for the collection of completed ballots by a third party, often referred to as ballot harvesting, to a felony. It raises fines for certain election law violations and requires that election supervisors perform voter list maintenance on a more frequent basis.Democrats, the minority party in the state legislature, have criticized the bill as a way for DeSantis to appeal to Republican voters who believe the 2020 election results were fraudulent while he flirts with a presidential run of his own.Late last month, a federal judge struck down portions of a sweeping election law passed last year in a blistering ruling that alleged the state’s Republican-dominated government was suppressing Black voters, and ordered that attempts to write similar new laws in the next decade must have court approval.US district judge Mark Walker overturned a provision of last year’s law limiting when people could use a drop box to submit their ballot, along with a section prohibiting anyone from engaging with people waiting to vote. He also blocked a section that placed new rules on groups that register voters, including one requiring that people working to register voters submit their names and permanent addresses to the state.The DeSantis administration is working to reverse Walker’s ruling.TopicsFloridaRon DeSantisUS politicsUS voting rightsnewsReuse this content More