Wednesday, May 23, 2012

NAACP wins National Voter Registration Act case


In a case brought by the NAACP, a federal judge ruled that the state of Louisiana was in violation of the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) of 1993.  U.S. District Judge Jane Richie Milazzo of the Eastern District of Louisiana ruled that state officials must provide voter-registration materials and assistance to welfare recipients whether benefits are applied for in person, online, through the mail and over the telephone.
“The court's ruling will ensure that low-income individuals will not be denied voter-registration services because of advancing technology,” said Sarah Brannon, director of the Public Agency Voter Registration Program at Project Vote, which is based in Washington, D.C. “The court recognized that the mandates of the NVRA are not limited to in-person visits to public-assistance offices.” Project Vote is a national, nonpartisan, nonprofit organization that promotes voting in historically underrepresented communities.
President Bill Clinton signing the National Voter Registration Act, 1993

The state of Louisiana argued in the case titled Ron Ferrand, Et AL versus Tom Schedler, ET AL, that state public-assistance agencies only were required to offer voter-registration forms and assistance to clients who registered in person or in one of the local offices.
Dale Ho, assistant counsel for the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund (LDF), said, “The vast majority of Louisiana's public-assistance clients never step foot in a state office….Louisiana's refusal to enforce NVRA risks denying tens of thousands of our poorest citizens a clear path to voter registration.”
In her ruling, Judge Milazzo wrote, “That mandating ‘in person’ requirements to Section 7 frustrates the plain intent of the NVRA. It is evident to this court that Congress’s purpose in enacting the NVRA was to ensure that all Americans are affirmatively provided an opportunity to register to vote. Congress made this intent clear when it uses such language as ‘in addition’ and ‘each.’ Thus, the reading of section 7 as applying to each transaction, whether it be in person or remote serves to accomplish the clear goal of Congress by ensuring access for public-assistance clients to the appropriate forms, no matter how they contact the public assistance offices.”
by Brent Scott: Executive Director of Vote by Mail America

No comments:

Post a Comment