voter intimidation

Voter Intimidation in Virginia

jaboone · October 30, 2020 ·

By Canaan Suitt

During the first presidential debate between President Donald Trump and former Vice President Joe Biden, Trump failed to condemn white supremacists when asked if he would do so by moderator Chris Wallace. Trump asked for a specific group, and Biden named the Proud Boys, a group with a “yearslong reputation for not only violence but very clear ties to white supremacy” according to Amy Cooter, a lecturer at Vanderbilt who studies nationalism, race, and rightwing militias. Trump responded: “Proud Boys, stand back and stand by.”

On social media, far-right groups celebrated Trump’s remark, interpreting it as legitimation of their efforts to combat “radical leftists” and as a call to arms to monitor polling places on Election Day. Andrew Anglin, founder of the Neo-Nazi Daily Stormer, said: “I got shivers. I still have shivers. He is telling the people to stand by. As in: Get ready for war.”

Something Fishy in South Carolina Referendum

Election Law Society · October 20, 2017 ·

By: Chandler Crenshaw

Picture Source Credit: Here

Concern of voter intimidation is not a novelty in politics. When elections may be close, supporters of a proposition may sometimes attempt to influence the election by giving voters an incentive to go to the ballot box for their cause. When these types of allegations occur, they often cause the people to view election results as “fishy”. In South Carolina, a recent school board referendum in Laurens County, situated in the northwest corridor of the state, was fishy. Rather, while the election results were not close, opponents of a failed tax referendum were accused of influencing voters by offering free fish sandwiches to those who voted. [Read more…] about Something Fishy in South Carolina Referendum

Pennsylvania is leading the charge to reenact Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act

Election Law Society · January 30, 2017 ·

By: Ebony Thomas

From slavery to Jim Crow, America has a long, dark history in the treatment of its African American citizenry. Although Congress ratified changes to the United States Constitution three times to benefit African Americans (i.e., the 13^th Amendment abolished slavery, the 14^th Amendment provided African Americans equal protection, and the 15^th Amendment gave African American men a right to vote), the franchise did not come easily for former slaves. Many states imposed barriers, such as poll taxes, literacy tests, intimidation, and other methods, to keep African Americans from accessing the ballot. It was not until 1965, under the leadership of President Lyndon B. Johnson, that the nation affirmed the promise of the Constitution to all Americans and effectively decimated States’ self-imposed barriers that kept African Americans from exercising their right to vote. This legislation is known as the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

PA: The Constitutionality of Poll Watching in Someone Else’s County

Election Law Society · November 3, 2016 ·

By: Melissa Rivera

As the November 8 presidential election is swiftly approaching, concerns by some of election fraud are rampant. Especially in Philadelphia, some are concerned that this traditionally blue city will experience voter fraud. In an effort to curb this fear, in Philadelphia alone, at least 474 Republican and over 3,700 Democrat volunteer poll watchers’ names were submitted to election officials for vetting. This vetting process ensures that each volunteer is a registered voter from the county where he or she will poll watch. This county requirement is the subject of a recent lawsuit filed by the Pennsylvania Republican Party.

Wisconsin: One Wisconsin Institute v. Nichol

Election Law Society · January 27, 2016 ·

By: Lisa Zhang

One Wisconsin institute, Citizen Action of Wisconsin Education Fund, and six Wisconsin residents filed a complaint against a series of provisions that Wisconsin has made since 2011 to its voting and election laws.

Interestingly, Wisconsin’s election laws just withstood a challenge that had lasted for four years. On March 23, 2015, the Supreme Court denied the petition for certiorari of Frank v. Walker. In Frank, plaintiffs challenged 2011 Wisconsin Act 23, which specifies limited acceptable forms of photo IDs, under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, and the district court found it in violation of both the 14^th Amendment and Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act (VRA). The 7^th Circuit reversed the judgement on the ground that Wisconsin’s Voter ID law does not differ in ways that matter under the analysis in Crawford v. Marion.