Leading Off
● Voter Registration: Election Day is swiftly approaching, and Tuesday is National Voter Registration Day. Consequently, it's a great time to double-check your voter registration online to make sure you're on the rolls, as well as a timely opportunity to encourage your peers to do the same, and to register if they haven't. Each state has its own laws governing registration, and deadlines are coming up soon in many of them. Organizations like Rock the Vote provide online information and forms specific to each state, but you should also check with your state’s secretary of state or elections board website to review its particular registration rules and double-check to make sure you're still registered.
Campaign Action
As we wrote in a previous Roundup regarding the history and origins of voter suppression in America, voter registration itself first came about in Northern cities the mid-1800s as a way to suppress the votes of Catholic immigrants and the working class, and the relative ease of voter registration today is a significant factor affecting turnout. Even today, many states still have specific barriers to the ballot, such as Florida’s disenfranchisement of those with felony convictions for life, or Michigan’s penalization of college students by forcing voters to register at the address on their driver's license and requiring those who register by mail to vote in person the first time.
However, not every state makes registration a pain, and North Dakota doesn’t even have it at all, only requiring that voters legally swear they’re eligible and prove their residency. Furthermore, many states have recently enacted policies to make voter registration less of a burden, and as the map at the top of this post displays, 11 states and Washington, D.C., have passed measures to automatically register eligible voters who interact with certain government agencies, such as driver's license offices, unless they opt out. Additionally, Michigan and Nevada are both voting on ballot initiatives that would enact automatic registration if they pass.
Most states still put the burden on voters to register instead of allowing the government to do it for them, but 37 states now allow voters to register online. Furthermore, 18 states and D.C. let voters cast a ballot at the same time as they register, although Maryland and North Carolina only allow it during the early voting period. However, Marylanders will vote on a state constitutional amendment in November that would enable voters to register on Election Day itself.
So go make sure you, your family, and your friends are registered to vote. And hopefully, more states will pass measures like the ones noted above to make the registration process as simple as possible and encourage citizens to do their civic duty and vote.
Redistricting
● Missouri: Missouri's legislative redistricting and ethics reform initiative cleared a major hurdle on Friday when a state appeals-court panel unanimously put it back on the ballot after a lower court had removed it a week before. Republican plaintiffs had challenged the measure, claiming it violated Missouri's restriction on the number of subjects a single measure may address, but the court disagreed. Republicans are appealing to the state Supreme Court, but Democratic appointees hold a majority on the bench. That’s no guarantee the measure will survive, but it's unclear if Republicans will find greater success before the high court.
As we have previously explained, this measure includes state ethics and lobbying reforms, plus a provision that would reform Missouri's current bipartisan state legislative redistricting commission to require that maps aim for partisan fairness in a state where geography gives Republicans a major edge. If the judiciary ultimately blocks this measure from appearing on the ballot, proponents would have another opportunity for a stand-alone initiative in 2020 to reform the process for the next decade's redistricting, but such a measure could be harder to pass without the more popular ethics reforms.
● Virginia: The federal district court overseeing the redrawing of Virginia's state House map expedited the process by requiring both parties to propose a nonpartisan "special master" by Thursday to assist the court in redrawing the lines if lawmakers don't pass a new map to replace 11 districts that were struck down for racial discrimination. Both parties have released their proposed plans, but with Democratic Gov. Ralph Northam threatening a veto, it's unlikely either will become law, as we've previously explained.
State Supreme Courts
● Florida: The League of Women Voters and Common Cause have filed a new version of their 2017 lawsuit seeking to stop Republican Gov. Rick Scott from trying to replace three of the state's seven Supreme Court justices whose terms end hours after Scott's own term expires in early January. Last year, the court rejected their lawsuit as untimely because Scott hadn't actually made any appointments, but now that Scott has asked the Judicial Nominating Commission to begin seeking potential nominees, they're renewing their push to stop him from usurping a power the voters rejected giving him in a 2014 referendum.
As we detailed last year, the replacements for these three liberals justices will determine whether the liberal bloc keeps their four-to-three majority, and preserving liberal control over the court will likely decide whether it enforces Florida's 2010 Fair Districts Amendments to bar Republican legislators from gerrymandering in the next decade. Scott has already tried to ensure a conservative majority by stacking the nominating commission with his allies as a way to hinder Democrat Andrew Gillum from picking his preferred justices if he wins the governor's race.
Subsequently, it's unclear what would happen if Scott tried to appoint justices to the same court that would decide whether the appointments were legal, setting up a potential constitutional crisis. Furthermore, it's uncertain what options Gillum would have if he became governor and Scott relented, since Gillum could be faced with a stacked nominating commission sending him only the names of partisan Republicans in a process that's supposed to be merit-based and apolitical.
Voter Suppression
● Arizona: In a setback for voting rights, a federal judge has rejected a lawsuit aimed at forcing GOP Secretary of State Michele Reagan to send out notification letters to 380,000 voters whose registrations she refused to automatically update when they updated their address with the state Department of Transportation. The plaintiffs had argued this was a violation of the National Voter Registration Act, commonly called the "Motor Voter" law, but the judge held that the plaintiffs failed to show they were harmed by Reagan's actions. The plaintiffs have yet to signal if they will appeal.
● Michigan: In a blow to college-student voting rights, a federal judge won't fast-track a lawsuit aimed at striking down a GOP-backed voting restriction that likely deters many college students from voting, making it likelier that the law will stay in place this year. As we've previously detailed, this law requires voters to register at the address on their driver's license, even if that address doesn't match their residence at school. The law also requires those who register by mail or through a third-party voter-registration drive to cast their first ballot in person instead of absentee.
The Supreme Court ruled in a 1979 case that college students have the right to vote at their school or at their parents' permanent address, and thus it would appear that the student plaintiffs have a compelling argument that this law unconstitutionally infringes on their voting rights. However, this law remaining in place for 2018 could deter many students from voting entirely by making it very inconvenient and more time-consuming.
● Missouri: Unlike the defeat in Arizona above, a federal district court ruled on Friday that Missouri’s Republican election administrators had indeed violated the NVRA by failing to update voter registrations for those who had changed their address with a state driver's license office. The court ordered officials to mail notices to roughly 40,000 voters who had changed their address but hadn’t had their voter registrations automatically updated.
Election Security
● Georgia: On Monday, federal district court Judge Amy Totenberg ruled that Georgia can continue to use paperless electronic voting machines this year despite the plaintiffs’ concerns that they are vulnerable to hacking and manipulation. Totenberg refused to issue an injunction due to the difficulties of replacing all 27,000 voting machines in a timely manner this year. However, Totenberg excoriated GOP Secretary of State Brian Kemp and other election officials for having "buried their heads in the sand" about the machines’ security flaws, and she urged the state to replace the machines by 2020.
Consequently, Kemp appealed the judge’s decision, even though he had already successfully defended electronic voting machines in this election, precisely because of the finding that Georgia's machines were vulnerable to hacking. Kemp, who is the Republican gubernatorial nominee, appears intent on stopping the state from having to switch to a more secure and accountable voting method.
Campaign Finance
● Campaign Finance: In a modest victory for campaign finance transparency, the Supreme Court has rejected a conservative "dark money" group's request for a stay of a lower court ruling that struck down a Federal Election Commission regulation that had shielded bogus "social welfare" groups from having to disclose their donors in most instances. Thanks to the Supreme Court's Citizens United ruling, these tax-exempt 501c(4)s can receive unlimited donations that they can spend on campaigns, but unlike super PACs or candidates, they generally didn't have to fully disclose their donors.
Consequently, third-party groups that spend money to directly support or oppose candidates may have to finally disclose donations over $200 once the FEC has set up a new rule to implement this decision. However, the conservative plaintiffs are still appealing on the merits, and such tax-exempt groups are still allowed to hide their donors if they run bogus "issue advocacy" ads that can pretend they aren't actually attacking or promoting a candidate, so long as they shy away from explicitly advocating a vote for or against said candidate.
