Jackson and Civil Rights Advocates Condemn New Voting Laws

By Philip Bunnell

Rev. Jesse Jackson joined other civil rights advocates and lawmakers at the House Triangle in front of the Capitol this morning to decry new laws in some states that require voters to present government issued ID when coming to the polls.  Jackson and his fellow speakers called the laws “draconian” and said that they were meant to discourage minorities from voting.

 In a letter to Eric Holder, the Attorney General, Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX) warned that “about 1 million of [Texas’s] 13.5 million registered voters lack photo identification documentation and would be harmed by this proposal.”  Texas recently passed a law that requires voters to present identification. 

The advocates dismissed the laws’ purported purpose, to stop voter fraud, as a minor problem that forcing someone to present identification cannot stop.

Instead, the advocates attested, the laws throw barriers in front of voters who usually vote Democrat.  “In Texas for example,” Jackson said, “students cannot use a student ID but can use a gun registration ID.”

Jesse Jackson accused the proponents of the laws of instituting a new poll tax.  Voters without identification would have to purchase one.  Jackson pointed out that “we don’t mind ID, but ID may be a utility bill,” or some other form of documentation that does not cost money.

Supreme Court considers "coalition districts" under the Voting Rights Act

Bartlett v. Strickland

Background: North Carolina House District 18 straddles two counties. The state constitution says that counties should not be divided between districts. The District was created in 2003 and was justified as being necessary to satisfy the Voting Rights Act (VRA), since the new district contains enough black people to get black candidates elected. The state courts have in past held that the VRA trumps the state constitution on this issue. In May 2004, county officials from one of the counties sued to get the district lines redrawn.

The lawsuit arises because the district is not a "majority minority district," where a minority group makes up a majority in the district (e.g. a district where blacks account for 51% of the population). Instead, the district is a "coalition district": blacks make up 39.36% of the population, but they make up 53.7% of registered Democrats, and Democrats make up 59% of the population. Therefore blacks are able to get candidates elected. Thus, North Carolina argues, the district is justified under the VRA.

Most of the argument session focused on whether the 50% threshold generally imposed for VRA-justified districts was arbitrary or not. While a minority group, voting as a block, can get candidates elected if it constitutes 50% of the population, it can (obviously) get candidates elected with less than 50%, and it may not be able to get candidates elected even if it has over 50% if it doesn't vote in a block. Justices (especially Justice Scalia) also had concerns about getting the judiciary branch involved in every districting decision.

The Court's decision will likely rest on how willing the Justices are to look at specific cases as opposed to abstract theories, and how willing the Justices are to let the courts get involved in districting decisions. The Court's decision will likely come well after this year's election, meaning (as the county official noted) it will be enforced in a single election before 2010's census.

FBI oversight ineffective; new investigation guidelines unclear

Multiple Congressmen expressed frustration at the inefficacy of FBI oversight as currently carried out by the House Judiciary Committee in a hearing today. FBI Director Robert Mueller was the sole witness. Chairman John Conyers (D-Mich.) opened the session complaining in an exasperated tone that the committee had not yet received a response to a September 5 letter asking about "the FBI’s anthrax investigation, disturbing revelations about the Bureau’s improper collection of information on reporters, the FBI’s approach to this country’s mortgage fraud crisis, and the expanded investigative and intelligence gathering powers resulting from the proposed Attorney General Guidelines concerning the FBI’s domestic operations."

Conyers and other congressmen elaborated in questions about why they wanted the Attorney General Guidelines (set to be made public in a few weeks), which Mueller said were still under review but which would unify the FBI's standards for starting investigations over different types of investigations. For example, the standards for when to open a criminal investigation are different from those used for national security investigations, and it is hoped that the new guidelines would make standards easier to follow. Congressman Artur Davis (D-Ala.), a former assistant U.S. Attorney, questioned Mueller about whether the new standards for opening an investigation would be lower than the standards police use for when they are allowed to stop and question a person (set out in the Terry v. Ohio Supreme Court decision of 1968). Mueller resisted the comparison, but Davis pointed out that the investigative activities carried out by the FBI are similar to those used by police. Mueller finally admitted that the standard has a lower threshold, so investigations could be opened without having reasonable suspicion based on "specific and articulable facts" that a person has committed, is committing, or is about to commit a crime.

Congressman Bill Delahunt (D-Mass.) expressed frustration at the committee's policy of allowing each congressman only 5 minutes for asking questions; "this format doesn't work," he said, pointing out that it was impossible to get deep into any issue in that time. He suggested the FBI could have experts in particular areas come testify, and on a more frequent basis than Director Mueller does. Mueller responded by saying that the committee will always be frustrated regardless of administration, as answers to questions must be vetted before being sent back. He also offered to come up to the hill at any time for briefings or discussions.

Congresswoman Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) asked Director Mueller about allegations that voters will be challenged at polling places if their homes have been foreclosed on. Mueller said he had not heard about that particular plan. He said the Department of Justice Civil Rights Division would investigate any such issue, though Mueller was unable to name the head of that division without the help of an aide. Mueller promised to follow up on making sure the Civil Rights Division knew about the problem, and Chairman Conyers assured Waters that Civil Rights Division head Grace Chung Becker would be testifying before the committee soon.