In 2018, the Texas legislature passed a bill eliminating the straight-ticket device, effective with the 2020 election. In 2020, some Texas voters and groups filed a federal lawsuit, alleging that repeal of the straight-ticket device violated the U.S. Constitution and the Voting Rights Act. A U.S. District Court ordered the state to restore the device for the 2020 election, but the Fifth Circuit stayed that order.
On March 16, the Fifth Circuit issued an opinion in the same case, Texas Alliance for Retired Americans v Scott, 20-40643. The opinion uses a technicality to end the lawsuit without ruling on the merits. The Fifth Circuit said the original Complaint is fatally defective because the plaintiffs sued the Secretary of State, but that they instead should have sued county election officials. The vote was 2-1.
Also on March 16, the same panel of Fifth Circuit judges rejected two more election lawsuits on the same grounds, that the plaintiffs should have sued county election officials instead of the Secretary of state. The other two cases are Richardson v Flores, 20-50774; and Lewis v Scott, 20-50654. Richardson deals with procedures for verifying signatures on postal ballots. Lewis v Scott deals with several provisions concerning postal ballots, including the voter’s need to pay return postage.
The two judges in the majority are Don Willett and Kyle Duncan, both Trump appointees. The dissenting judge is Patrick Higginbotham, a Reagan appointee. The majority’s conclusion that the Secretary of State is not the proper defendant in a constitutional election law case is very much contrary to over fifty years of precedent from around the nation (in states in which the Secretary of State is in charge of elections; in some states the State Board of Elections runs elections).
2 more Trump hacks at work —
letting more ROT go on and on.
—-
Elect ALL judges –
nonpartisan Appv – pending Condorcet
So what’s the problem? If the lawsuit was not valid, shouldn’t the straight ticket be cancelled this year, since the legislature already cancelled it?
There is no straight-ticket device in Texas this year. But if the people who think that the Constitution or the Voting Rights Act requires it, they would now need to file new lawsuits, each one against various counties, which is certainly cumbersome. I suspect they will give up.
The other two cases the Fifth Circuit decided yesterday are more important, and I can imagine one of them might get US Supreme Court review.
“There is no straight-ticket device in Texas this year. But if the people who think that the Constitution or the Voting Rights Act requires it, they would now need to file new lawsuits, each one against various counties, which is certainly cumbersome. I suspect they will give up.”
Sounds like a good thing to me if they give up. No?
What is az bitching about this time? I know everyone is a hack, moron, evil, killer, enslaver, troll, rotten, etc etc, anything and everything negative as far as he’s concerned. Except him naturally. But what did they do wrong this time? Sounds to me like the judges did good this time. Or ..
is azhole actually in favor of the straight ticket??? Maybe that’s it.
And by everyone I really mean everyone. Counterexamples welcome.
I really dislike straight-ticket devices. But this decision does not make me happy. If courts generally say the plaintiffs must sue every county when they have a constitutional ballot access case, that would make lawsuits far more expensive. Each one typically has a court filing fee of $500 or so, so if the plaintiffs can’t sue a state official, and must sue multiple county officials in multiple lawsuits, that would be very bad.
If the supreme court disagrees with the 5th about the county thing in one of the other cases were that to reach them, would this particular decision nevertheless still stand?
It could go either way, depending on the language of the decision in one of the other cases.
The claim is that removal of straight ticket voting would produce longer lines.
But that would not be true if a county provided sufficient voting machines or used paper ballots.
Further if there is a material difference in the time to vote a straight ticket then voting times would show two humps and straight-ticket voters would be identifiable violating their right to a secret ballot.
In addition election officials should have recognized that voters in some areas take more time to vote and moved more voting machines to those areas.
The law
Having one choice for all elections makes the lines move really, really fast. In fact it would save a lot of people the whole time and effort of voting altogether, especially if there are also no write ins.
Having two or more choices can be really confusing to some people, especially the elderly. It is elder abuse and discrimination against the learning disabled to give them more than one choice on the ballot.
ALL PAPER MAIL BALLOTS —
OREGON — SURVIVING SINCE CIRCA 2000.
HOW MANY STATES NOW WITH ONLY PAPER MAIL BALLOTS ???
All voters should vote in person, on election day only. There should be stairs and NO wheelchair ramps at every polling place. A caucus where people stand in a corner with other supporters of their candidate in their precinct is even better. Expand that to general elections. Being able to stand up and remain standing for several hours should be a requirement to be able to vote.
@WM,
1. Approval voting does not work with multimember elections.
2. Party officials are free to campaign against any candidate.
Birds Aren’t Real!