JURIST Supported by the University of Pittsburgh
PAPER CHASE NEWSBURSTDigest RSS feedFull RSS feed
Serious law. Primary sources. Global perspective.


Saturday, July 08, 2006

Georgia judge blocks voter ID law as unconstitutional
James M Yoch Jr at 10:10 AM ET

[JURIST] Judge Melvin K. Westmoreland of Fulton County Superior Court [official website] issued a temporary restraining order Friday blocking the implementation of Georgia's photo identification cards for voters, holding that the authorizing bill [SB 84 materials] violates the state constitution [text] by placing an undue burden on the fundamental right to vote and that it would require a state constitutional amendment to legally take effect. Westmoreland blocked the Republican-backed voter ID law [JURIST news archive], which was approved by the US Department of Justice [JURIST report] in April, based on a legal challenge filed by former Democratic Gov. Roy E. Barnes that alleges the law makes voting more difficult for minorities, the elderly and the poor. Republican officials, who are expected to appeal the restraining order to the state supreme court, contend that the law is necessary to prevent voter fraud, but Democrats maintain that there is no problem with voter fraud in the state with no reported cases in over a decade. The voter ID cards are slated to be used for the first time in a state primary scheduled for July 18, but the restraining order effectively blocks their use until the matter is resolved in a civil trial or by a higher state court.

On Wednesday, the ACLU and other voting rights advocates filed a motion [text, PDF] in federal district court seeking a preliminary injunction, arguing that the bill authorizing the cards violates the Equal Protection Clause of the US Constitution's Fourteenth Amendment [text] as well as the Civil Rights Act of 1964 [text], and that it constitutes a poll tax in violation of the Twenty-fourth Amendment [text]. The state will submit briefs in support of the law on Monday, and on Wednesday the district court will hear oral arguments regarding the injunction. The New York Times has more.






Link |  | print | subscribe | RSS feeds | latest newscast | Facebook page

For more legal news check the Paper Chase Archive...


LATEST LEGAL NEWS

 Hungary prosecutors charge accused Nazi with war crimes
1:19 PM ET, June 18

 ICC grants Kenya VP's request to skip parts of upcoming trial
12:23 PM ET, June 18

 Libya senior judge assassinated outside courthouse
9:29 AM ET, June 18

 click for more...

Get JURIST legal news delivered daily to your e-mail!

LATEST FORUM

Is Egypt's Stance on the Blue Nile Dam Legally Justified?
DOMESTIC
Zeray Yihdego
University of Aberdeen School of Law

ABOUT

Paper Chase is JURIST's real-time legal news service, powered by a team of 30 law student reporters and editors led by law professor Bernard Hibbitts at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law. As an educational service, Paper Chase is dedicated to presenting important legal news and materials rapidly, objectively and intelligibly in an accessible, ad-free format.

CONTACT

Paper Chase welcomes comments, tips and URLs from readers. E-mail us at JURIST@jurist.org