As the elections approach, news reports have been full of legal battles surrounding efforts in various states to restrict access to the voting booth. These efforts may be traced back to the results of the 2008 election, which might otherwise be interpreted as reflecting an inter-racial detente in American society; however, it may not be working out that way.
Attorney Dale Ho, Director of the National Voting Rights Project of the American Civil Liberties Union, addressed a luncheon at the Boston offices of the Bingham McCutchen law firm on October 16th. He noted that before 2008, only two states had restrictions on voter registration which required the presentation of one of a small number of government-issued IDs bearing a photograph. By August, 2012, twelve states had such a provision. In 2013, after the United States Supreme Court struck down Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, thirteen more states adopted new restrictive laws, many of similar import.
It seems statistically irrefutable that the effect of these various laws work against young people, and racial minorities, getting to the voting booth. These laws come in several flavors, and while many laws require photo IDs which may be difficult to obtain (elderly without drivers licenses in Texas may need to travel 250 miles to reach the Texas equivalent of the Department of Motor Vehicles in order to obtain a license), other provisions include: shrinking the period of time prior to an election that early voting can occur; preventing early voting on the day before election day (cutting into the practice of poorer churches that on Sunday they organize voters and on the following Monday, the day before election day, they drive them to the polls); requiring registration of individuals who assist people in obtaining voter status, and requiring their filing of monthly state reports (struck down by the courts); elimination of pre-registration qualification for younger teens; elimination of a civics course in high school.
Prior to 2008, most voter litigation involved improper districting (gerrymandering). Since 2008, almost all the litigation involves voter ID and related new state regulations. The Civil Liberties Union and other groups are sometimes, but not always, successful in barring the operation of these voter limitations either in Federal Court or in State Courts.
Finally, there was discussion of laws limiting rights of felons, once released from incarceration, to vote. Felony convictions fall disproportionally on minority groups. Four states permanently bar felons from voting, and other states have varying disqualification provisions. The United States has the highest incarceration rate of any Western democracy. If all the people presently in prison for felonies were to be organized into a state, that state would have six votes in our Electoral College.
Conclusion: There is going to be voter access litigation for a long time to come.