Texas's Secretary of State, Nandita Berry, took action today after Judge Ramos declared Texas Voter I.D. Law unconstitutional.
She put out a press release.
AUSTIN — “We have received a copy of the judge’s ruling in this matter. The ruling is currently under review by my office and the Office of the Attorney General. As always, the Office of the Secretary of State will assist Texas election officials in providing elections that are smooth, secure and successful.” –Texas Secretary of State Nandita Berry
Decision:
THE REMEDY
“No right is more precious in a free country than that of having a voice in the election of those who make the laws under which, as good citizens, we must live. Other rights, even the most basic, are illusory if the right to vote is undermined” To preserve that right, the Court, pursuant to its equitable powers and to redress the VRA claims of discriminatory result and discriminatory purpose, will enter a permanent and final injunction against inforcement of the voter identification provisions, Sections 1 through 15 and 17 through 22, of SB 14.583
To avoid piecemeal decision making, including piecemeal appellate review, and also because the claims rely on many of the same underlying facts, the Court has ruled on each of the legal theories presented. In addition, the requests for a preclearance order
under Section 3(c) of the Voting Rights Act, and for authorization of election observers
under Section 3(a) of the Act, depend on a finding that SB 14 was enacted with a discriminatory purpose, and therefore the Court was obligated to rule on the purpose issue. The injunction described above is sufficient to remedy the Plaintiffs’ as-applied challenge to the unconstitutional burden that SB 14 places on the right to vote, along with the challenge to SB 14 as a poll tax. No further delineation of relief as to those claims is
required at this time.
Under the injunction to be entered barring enforcement of SB 14’s voter identification provisions, Texas shall return to enforcing the voter identification requirements for in-person voting in effect immediately prior to the enactment and implementation of SB 14. Should the Texas Legislature enact a different remedy for the statutory and constitutional violations, this Court retains jurisdiction to review the legislation to determine whether it properly remedies the violations. Any remedial enactment by the Texas Legislature, as well as any remedial changes by Texas’s administrative agencies, must come to the Court for approval, both as to the substance of the proposed remedy and the timing of implementation of the proposed remedy.
By subsequent order, the Court will set a status conference to address the procedures to be followed for considering Plaintiffs’ request for relief under Section 3(c) of the Voting Rights Act.
ORDERED this 9th day of October, 2014.
NELVA GONZALES RAMOS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
583 SB 14 includes a severability clause, to which this Court defers, Leavitt v. Jane L., 518 U.S. 137, 139 (1996) (per curiam), and therefore the injunction shall not apply to these provisions of SB 14 that do not relate to voter identification for in-person voting. Accordingly, the injunction to be issued shall not apply to sections 16, 23, and 24 of SB 14.
While the decision declared the pertinent sections unconstitutional the remedy didn't place any requirements for the Secretary of State to take actions.
In person early voting begins a week from Monday and that doesn't allow much time for the appeals process to be completed and that process won't even start until the injunction is filed.