Challenges to voter ID law put North Carolina at center of national battle (+video)
North Carolina Gov. McCrory defended the new voter ID law as 'common sense' and popular, but two lawsuits in federal court say the measures will discriminate against African-American voters.
(Page 2 of 2)
The action comes two months after the US Supreme Court invalidated the portion of the VRA that required state and local governments with a history of past discrimination to submit their election changes to Washington before they could implement them. The high court said Congress applied outdated criteria to determine which jurisdictions would be subject to special voting scrutiny.Skip to next paragraph
In Pictures MLK: Unfinished legacy
Subscribe Today to the Monitor
The law had imposed pre-clearance requirements on nine states and on counties or municipalities in six other states.
The Supreme Court action left in place another section of the VRA that empowers a federal judge to impose the pre-clearance requirements on any state if the judge finds the state has engaged in intentional discrimination in voting.
Supporters of the voter ID law in North Carolina say it is not discriminatory. They defend the new law as a measured means to safeguard the integrity of elections in North Carolina.
“While some will try to make this seem to be controversial, the simple reality is that requiring voters to provide a photo ID when they vote is a common sense idea,” McCrory said when signing the bill into law.
“This new law brings our state in line with a healthy majority of other states throughout the country,” he said.
Opponents of the measure say there is no significant problem with voter fraud in North Carolina that would justify the voter ID burdens imposed on minority voters and others.
Prior to the Supreme Court’s ruling on the Voting Rights Act, 40 of North Carolina’s 100 counties were required to obtain federal approval before implementing any voting changes. The North Carolina lawsuits, if successful, would impose that requirement on the entire state for a period of time set by the judge.
“With the stroke of his pen, Gov. McCrory has transformed North Carolina from a state with one of the nation’s most progressive voting systems, where we saw some of the highest voter turnout rates of the last two presidential elections, into a state with the most draconian policies we’ve seen in decades, policies that harken back to the days of Jim Crow,” said Penda Hair, codirector of the Advancement Project, a civil rights group supporting the NAACP litigation.
The lawsuit says that the voter ID law imposes special burdens on African-American voters. It says African-Americans are less likely than other voters to possess a driver’s license or other acceptable ID, and adds that they face disproportionately greater burdens in obtaining such documents.
“As a result,” the suit said, “African-American voters are more likely than other North Carolina voters to have their votes denied, diluted, or abridged [by the new voter ID law].”
Eliminating same-day voter registration and cutting back on the number of early voting days also hits African-America voters harder than others, the suit says.
“These provisions will disproportionately injure African-American voters because African-American voters in North Carolina use same-day registration and early-voting opportunities at higher rates than white voters,” the NAACP suit said. Seventy percent of African-American votes during the 2012 election were cast during the period of early voting, according to the complaint.
Early voting on Sundays is seen as particularly important. Many churches in minority communities run “Souls to the Polls” programs that help transport large numbers of African-American voters to the polls after Sunday services.
The new voter ID law cuts seven days out of the early voting period and eliminates one of two Sundays available for early voting.