Skip to main content

Courts in Minnesota, like those in several other states, are currently considering a number of lawsuits stemming from right-wing attempts to keep as many young, poor, disabled, and/or ethnic-minority Americans as possible from casting votes in the 2012 election.

Today a federal judge in Minnesota issued a welcome decision (PDF) dismissing a lawsuit filed by the right-wing Minnesota Voters Alliance and Minnesota Freedom Council that sought to strangle, if not simply eliminate, Minnesota's popular election-day registration ("EDR") system.

The suit named Minnesota Secretary of State Mark Ritchie, Minnesota Attorney General Lori Swanson, and officials from three counties (urban Ramsey, exurban Chisago, and rural Crow Wing) as defendants, arguing that those officials violated the plaintiffs' constitutional rights by counting the ballots of thousands of election-day registrants in the 2006, 2008, and 2010 elections without first "confirming" those registrants' eligibility to vote.

The plaintiffs also argued that Minnesota's statutes on voting by disabled people are unconstitutional, on the grounds that they fail to remove voting rights from people (including the son of one of the plaintiffs) whom plaintiffs believe to be incapable of voting.

Today U.S. District Judge Donovan Frank, a Clinton appointee, granted the defendants' motions to dismiss the case, holding that

  • Plaintiffs' rights weren't violated, because there is no legal requirement that state or local election officials "confirm" a voter's eligibility (a ridiculously arduous task with severe consequences on voting rights if officials were to get it wrong) before counting her vote—all voters swear to their eligibility, under penalty of state and federal felony prosecution, before casting a ballot, and election-day registrants are required to provide additional evidence of residence;
  • Under longstanding case law, federal courts don't have jurisdiction over complaints about state election procedures unless there are major "aggravating factors," such as evidence of intentional corruption, present—and plaintiffs here offered nothing of the kind; and
  • Plaintiffs had entirely failed to exhaust the state-level processes by which they could have challenged the eligibility and/or the votes of the persons they believe to have voted while ineligible.

Judge Frank also dismissed the plaintiffs' legal claims regarding the eligibility of disabled voters, pointing out that (1) the plaintiffs had no standing to bring those claims and (2) plaintiffs' allegations regarding the state guardianship process and the voting rights of people subject to it were false.


Quick update: Less than 25 minutes after the publication of Frank's decision, the plaintiffs have filed notice of their appeal to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals. ...Gee, that didn't take long.


The case has gotten less press attention than other pending election lawsuits in Minnesota (the more closely watched cases at the moment are the challenges involving the Voter ID and anti-gay-marriage constitutional amendments, challenges currently pending before the state supreme court), but local media have taken some note: here are blog entries from the Minneapolis Star Tribune, the St. Paul Pioneer Press, Minnesota Public Radio, and The Uptake covering today's decision.

Minnesota Secretary of State Mark Ritchie, the lead defendant in the case, had this statement:

Today Judge Frank affirmed the constitutionality of same-day voter registration.

Minnesota’s same-day voter registration serves as a model for our nation and, in part, accounts for our consistent top ranking in voter participation among all states. This year alone, the Office of the Minnesota Secretary of State projects 500,000 eligible voters will use same-day voter registration at the General Election on November 6, 2012. Judge Frank’s decision ensures that these voters, many who will cast votes for the first time, will have their voices heard on Election Day.

This settles the first of two recent challenges to same-day voter registration. The other is the proposed constitutional amendment on elections which, if passed, would eliminate same-day voter registration as we know it. It is now up to the voters to decide the fate of same-day voter registration for Minnesota in November.

No statements yet from the plaintiff organizations, though I'm keeping an eye on their websites.


All in all, a good day for voters' rights in Minnesota.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site