On July 20, an en banc panel of all 15 full-time Fifth Circuit judges issued an opinion in Veasey v State of Texas, 14-41127. Nine of the fifteen voted that the Texas law requiring certain kinds of government photo-ID law have a racially disparate effect, and therefore the law violates Section Two of the Voting Rights Act. Most members of the majority held that Texas legislators did not intend to discriminate, but that the law in reality does discriminate.
The decision is significant because ten of the fifteen judges are appointees of Republican presidents. All of the judges appointed by Democratic presidents were in the majority, but also four Republican appointees were in the majority. Those Republican appointees are Judges W. Eugene Davis, Edward Prado, Leslie Southwick, and Catharina Haynes. The majority opinion is 86 pages. Two judges in the majority dissented and said they believe the legislature acted with discriminatory intent, and each wrote separately. The judges who wanted to uphold the law wrote several dissents. The main dissent is 68 pages long; another dissent is three pages; yet another is six pages. The entire package has 203 pages.
The majority does not strike down the Texas law, but says it must be changed so that persons who cannot get the required ID must have some means of voting anyway. The majority sends the case back to the U.S. District Court for that Court to fashion a specific remedy. Thanks to Rick Hasen for the link.
