Getty Images
We've been keeping a close eye on Republican efforts to suppress early voting in Ohio, and Democratic efforts to create a level playing field. Today, a federal court delivered a major victory to those who support expansive voting rights and opportunities.
U.S. District Court Senior Judge Peter C. Economus ordered Republican Secretary of State Jon Husted not to enforce a state law passed last year that closed that window to in-person early voting to anyone but members of the military and their families.
"This Court notes that restoring in-person early voting to all Ohio voters through the Monday before Election Day does not deprive (military) voters from early voting,'' wrote Judge Economus, a Clinton appointee. "Instead, and more importantly, it places all Ohio voters on equal standing.
"The only hindrance to (military) early voting is the Secretary of State's failure to set uniform hours at elections boards during the last three days before Election Day,'' he wrote. "On balance, the right of Ohio voters to vote in person during the last three days prior to Election Day -- a right previously conferred to all voters by the State -- outweighs the State's interest in setting the 6 p.m. Friday deadline.''
[Update: the ruling is available online here.]
To briefly recap for those who haven't been following this story, Ohio allowed voters an early-voting window of three days before Election Day, which in turn boosted turnout and alleviated long lines. This year, Republican officials wanted to close the window -- active-duty servicemen and women could vote early, but no one else, not even veterans, could enjoy the same right.
One prominent Republican official recently conceded he opposes weekend voting because it would "accommodate the urban -- read African American -- voter-turnout machine."
President Obama's campaign team filed suit, asking for a level playing field, giving every eligible Ohio voter -- active-duty troops, veterans, and civilians -- equal access. Today, a federal court agreed. If the ruling stands, every eligible Ohio voter will be able to cast a ballot during the three-day, early-voting window leading up to Election Day on Nov. 6.
In an amusing twist, the ruling even cites Bush v. Gore. Economus wrote the "Court stresses that where the state has authorized in-person early voting through the Monday before Election Day for all voters, 'the state may not, by later arbitrary and disparate treatment, value one person's vote over that of another.' "Here, that is precisely what the state has done."
Ohio will surely appeal, but for now, this is a major development that may even influence the outcome of the presidential race -- the more Ohio voters have access to their own elections process, the harder it is for Republicans to win.
Leave a Comment:
3...2...1..Obama using the courts to "Fix " the election , Why this is worse than Acorn
Seriously? You missed the point that the GOP has been using their positions of power to limit opportunities of all people to vote in this election.
@Judith Re: #1.1
I think #1 was snark. Just a prediction about what the Republican response will be.
Once again, I beg thee powers-that-be for a sarcasm font!! :-) Or at least for new/ish posters to get acquainted with the more regular posters here.
Judith, sick was playing the role of an outraged GOP apologizer there.
Easy Judith. I do think he was kidding
Keeping the voting laws as they have been, preventing one party from changing the laws for transparently partisan reasons- to prevent legitimate voters from voting because they are "urban, read African American"- that's "fixing" the election? What kind of Through the Looking Glass thinking is that? It's clearly the Ohio republicans who are trying to "fix" the election, as this federal judge properly found.
ARE YOU THAT UNEDUCATED? AND MISINFORMED? OR JUST NOT USED TO READING? The more you read the less you retain is that it? stop your bigoted perspective and ask yourself who started this voting conspiracy..perfect example why USA is not even in the top bracket when it comes to education!
Sorry Judith /snark missing
You don't know me very well do you?
Purple thumbs for all. Stop this voter fraud once and for all
Re: #1.6
Huh?
re 1.8.
I know, right? Major #ironyFAIL.
Sickand effin tired you appear to be sickintheeffinhead
Sorry @sickineffin et al. The GOP convention has me all twitchy and reactive. Sorry I jumped the gun. :-/
Acorn? You mean that little thing Republicans created back in 2004? Then we all found the whole thing was a set up done by Republicans? Ah Memories: Due to their success in registering voters, ACORN has long been a strawman target for the GOP. In 2004, for example, just days before the Presidential election, the wingnut media even went so far as to falsely report that the group had registered a terrorist to vote in Ohio.
I love that they still use it on Faux Nooze ... just can't let go of a good boogyman
c'mon people, the original poster was counting down to the predictable and phony outrage reaction from the right-wing talking machine, hence the use of the regular buzz-words, like "ACORN."
Well, I think "Sick-n-effin-tired" meant what he said. I think he needs a very long nap. His response is a typically conservative response to anything Obama does to right a wrong - blame Obama when the Republicans are at fault. It's a cheap diversionary tactic. "Look, the black guy is trying to fix the election." Please, one has to be stupid, and I do mean very stupid, to believe that crap. If Republicans really thought they could win in November, they wouldn't be trying so hard to suppress the "urban vote," so to speak.
If you would simply look a couple posts further upthread Sick clearly explains what they were going on about.
There are number of regular posters- many of whom followed Steve Benen from his former digs- that have a snark bone in their typing finger. Since we will never have that special font- he!!, be thankful that Craptcha didn't tag along- here's a tag line that I now use. Copy and paste it at your pleasure.
(for those lacking a sarcasm meter, the above is “snark”)
So what about those who have been fired for opposing this?
Good question
They will still be fired.
And unfortunately the ruling has little chance of standing because, as reported in Think Progress:
http://thinkprogress.org/health/2011/05/11/172078/sutton-brunner
The fix is in.
It good to see that the courts are still some what for America. its also good to see the string of victory's out number the one or two that the court blew.
This is FABULOUS news, for me as an Ohioan as well as for the hope it might bring to other states facing similar GOP discriminatory voting restrictions. Clearly, the GOP (even by their own admission) has targeted limiting the opportunity of some Americans to vote as one strategy to win this election. I hope these court rulings have not come too late to positively impact the rights of voters to allow their voices to be heard on election day! Thank you, Rachel, for keeping this in the country's purview in ways that called the question and made GOP officials squirm. You are awesome!
My advice is not to get comfortable. Not only will the GOP appeal this ruling but at the polls in November, you can bet your bippy that GOP operatives will be turning people away with the fiction that the law went through.
I do hope the the Democrats in Ohio are prepared to have poll-watchers in lefty districts to make sure people can vote.
Really, watch out for the True the Vote Stormtroopers
http://www.truethevote.org/
The ultimate inverted Rovian tactic. These ones really scare me.
Yes, I fear the same re appeals. But glad to know the courts are responding; maybe will put pressure on them? Anyway, I am doing my best to help with voter registration and encouraging folks to get out to the polls. This GOP administration makes it hard.
And sorry, @sick-n-effin-tired for jumping the gun on your comment. As I said in another post, watching the GOP Circus has me all twitchy. :-/
Well our convention is coming up , but woe is me how , how in the name of Jebus will we top Clint Eastwood.
We must do something to spur the sales of pearls and fainting couches .
Give them something to get really apoplectic about.
a tiny sigh of relief heard round the country among those who remember what equal rights are about and for whom they are intended -- ALL of us.
A free country should allow weeks of voting....voting should be the easiest thing in the world. Kudos to the judge who protected the right of the Ohio voters.
Wow - good news!!
Maybe there is some hope for a reasonably fair election after all.
Still waiting to see if anything can be done to restore some semblance of fairness here in Pennsyltucky...
Vulture/Voucher 2012
Proving Two Rights DO Make a Wrong!
;-)
Yipeeeeee So glad the blatant discrimination has been stopped in its tracks!
Much needed encouragement as I was feeling frustrated with the Repubs trying to buy the election. Great job Ohio and Team Obama.
They still are trying in Ohio. The senate race is drawing Rove's attention, and PAC.
any one else feel like the GOP BS machine has started to run aground? Even faux news is calling the BS, BS. Great news for the American voter.
This is fantastic news but I fear that Democrats and their supports will relax and assume that all will be well in November. That will not happen in my opinion.
The GOP/TP will do it's utmost to keep people from voting no matter what the law states. Please, for the love of all that's holy Dems, DON'T get complacent or feel like it's all okay now.
well they still have control over the die-bold voting machines. so not all the way out of the woods.
Note that the judge stated it was only the Republican Ohio Secretary of State who had deprived the military of their fair right to vote!:
"The only hindrance to (military) early voting is the Secretary of State's failure to set uniform hours at elections boards during the last three days before Election Day,'' he wrote."
(Recall how the Romney campaign and GOP-at-large lied that it was the Obama administration that was trying to interfere with military voting rights.)
Now let's see if those election supervisors in Dayton get their job back Mr. Ohio Secretary of State.
As it has been said earlier Democrats do not become complacent, this is not over yet.
Republican Secretary of State Jon Husted wants control and does not like to lose, he is not done.
Efforts to subvert our democracy should be punishable by death. Republicans would obviously oppose this because it would mean an awful lot of them would die. If Obama is so bad, why can't they win without lying and cheating?
The Ohio judge stuck his finger in the SCOTUS eye. The majority opinion in Bush v. Gore that was written by the 5 conservatives stated that the opinion was limited to the circumstances presented in the case and not to be cited as precedent. But the Ohio judge did it anyway. If the Ohio decision is appealed and ends up in the SCOTUS, it is going to put the 5 Supremes on the spot who are going to have to do a song and dance to get around the issue and the Bush case. This is a case that legal scholars will use to excoriate the SCOTUS on the Ohio and Bush cases for being partisan if their only basis for reversing the case is the fact that the decision used Bush v. Gore as precedent.
Quick question (posing this to anyone who might know). My brain is a bit jumbled right now with all the convention stuff in it (and work stuff, and moving house stuff, and dog sick stuff...)
Wasn't Ohio the state where the Secy of State or top election officer FIRED two guys who wouldn't go along with his demand to ban weekend voting?
So what happens to those two guys? Cuz they got fired. Will they get reinstated because they were RIGHT all along?
I think legally they have to be reinstated. Because the grounds they were dismissed on. By the courts standards by the ruling of this case. Were circumstantial. Because you cannot legally firing individuals for violating a law. That has now been deemed in fact not legally applicable in the first place.
Now Ohio's Sec of State can argue that. They can not be retroactively reinstated because a law was overturned by the courts. Because the law was in fact in effect during their firing. But it will be very difficult to argue and win that argument on its merits.
Now for the SCOTUS argument. About Bush v Gore was not to be used as precedent. And then later is for this case. SCOTUS rulings by default can and will be used as precedent in other cases. Because it's a ruling handed down by the Supreme Court. And for SCOTUS to over turn a lower courts ruling. based solely on them using a Supreme Court Case as precedent, that SCOTUS suggested not to be. In itself is going to be tough to pull off. And not seem totally partisan doing so.
In order for SCOTUS to over turn this ruling. And not be subject ot an overwhelming sense of partisanship and fallout from that. They are going to have to find some legal grounds to do so. Which is going to be hard to do. Because they are going to have to find some way that suggests. That allowing one sect of people to vote during certain times. And not allowing the other sects to do the same. is some how not A) infringing on the rights of the voters not allowed to do so. and B) That it doesn't violate the voting rights act and C) it is constitutional acceptable to do what Ohio tried to do.
And judging on how Roberts upheld The ACA. It's in my opinion that Roberts is less likely to seem like the SCJ. That allowed voter suppression to held on his watch. Roberts has a legacy as a SCJ he wants to be conveyed. And it being one of an overtly partisan SC isn't the one he wants. If that was the case. He would have voted to against the ACA. I honestly believe that although Roberts is a Conservative. He's not one of the ones. Who view the US Constitution as a document that inconveniences his party at times.
That Roberts is a guy that knows. The US Constitution is there solely because. It grants every citizen it's basic rights as an American. That you may not agree with ones politics or religion or any other factor But every citizen has the same basic rights and principles for living in this country. And to be a SCJ isn't about doing what is best for your political ideals. But what is best for the entire country. And I just can;t see Roberts saying Hey I'm going to be the guy who denies people the right to vote. Because it's in the best interest of my political party. Much like he was not going to be the guy who said. That I'm going to be the guy who denies 30 million people health insurance. Because my party doesn't like the idea.
Roberts' problem with the ACA is that two conservative should have recused themselves because of their ties and/or previous remarks about health care. There were calls for the judges to recuse which they did not do. If the ACA decision was decided by one vote to overturn, the calls for investigations by the Senate of the judges would have increased and possible resulted in discipline that would include censure. Roberts knows that Thomas and Scalia may not withstand public scrutiny if hearings were held and people believed these judges acted in a partisan way. The SCOTUS is already dealing with charges of partisanship and investigations would bring disrepute on the court and its decisions. Roberts does not want to go down in legal history as having presided over multiple contentious cases that were decided based on partisanship. Bush v. Gore will go down in history as a black mark on the Roberts court. It makes no sense to pile on more black marks.
I think it's time to take the application of our right to vote out of the hands of politicians altogether. I believe a Federal Elections Agency needs to be established and a Federal Board of Elections assigned to each state to administer all national elections to include both the Presidency and both houses of the Federal Legislature.
All I can say right now is: Whoop whoop!!!
Can I start watching the news again? Hooray!
This IS good news!
I just don't see the registration of and casting votes as a "problem", except that not enough people are doing those things.
We just have too much apathy and attention on entertainment while people wring hands about jobs. Well, let's stop handing over the keys to business people who are only interested in profit, not the interests and well-being of Americans.
I agree with a post I saw this morning to the effect that America needs a "Department of Common Sense" to which I would add accordingly that it should not cost a single taxpayer one thin dime. Thanks, judge, for the ruling!!
Just another round of fighting. The State will appeal. The next judge may be a bought and paid for Bush appointee.
The populace of Ohio should be outraged at the huge waste of money and time of one party trying to disenfranchise voters of any stripe. Our forefathers (and mothers) fought too hard to win these rights for anyone to mess with.
Time for a national set of rules for voting and an online system. Let's bring voting up to the 1980's at least!
Stay vigilant folks. Let's be ready for what they do to hurt Democracy next.
Many in Ohio are outraged and we will remember when we vote (provided that we CAN vote). It's not like our TP Gov, or the republican majority will help out with that. We can only fix it with a vote.
Online voting has too many security issues.
I just find it interesting that the call to arms to change voting was to stop fraud. As we all know it is rampant at something like 700 issues out of 400,000,000 million votes. (sarcasm for those who are The Sheldon Coopers... :) ) The Republican process only tries to eliminate voters. If they are so concerned about having all voters vote legally, then why have the done nothing to get those voters the ID's that they require?
Thanks for the Big Bang reference.
That is really something to focus upon, the Republicans are OK with lying, concealing what they did and would do, obstruct and take hostages to the brink, playing chicken with our credit rating and blurring the lines about the debt ceiling being something to just not pay and we must cut 40% immediately. That'll help with jobs…ugh. So sad.
As long as they just say any false stuff to get people to blame liberals, Democrats and President Obama for not turning this Great Recession around fast enough. Oh sure business men need to run America, which is what we had with Bush and now Citizens United, pouring lobby money into elections and keep Democratic voting to a minimum.
Because I am disabled, I vote by mail, here in Florida, but stopping any American of their right to vote is not just a bad thing to do but it's also illeagle. This has to stop now.
because I am disabled, I vote by mail, here in Florida, but stopping any American of their right to vote is not just a bad thing to do, it's also illeagle. This has to stop now.
This could all be much easier: make election day a national holiday(all businesses closed), so everyone can vote.
Makes sense to me.
What was the logic for having it on Tuesday anyway??