Democracy enthusiasts had a good day last week.
First, the background:
Caging originated in 1981, according to the DNC, when the RNC formed an operation called National Ballot Security Task Force. The task force sent out postcards in New Jersey to predominately Hispanic and black districts with a “do not forward” requirement. The 45,000 cards that were returned were then used to create a list of voters for the GOP to challenge at the polls, on the grounds that the voters no longer lived at the addresses on their voter registration cards.
The DNC filed a lawsuit against the RNC over this practice, which resulted in a 1982 consent decree. The RNC agreed not to engage in the same practice “where the purpose or significant effect of such activities is to deter qualified voters from voting.” In 1986, however, the RNC did the same thing in Louisiana, according to the lawsuit when it attempted to get 31,000 voters removed from the rolls based solely upon the return of a mailed postcard. The 1982 case was then reopened, and the consent decree was amended in 1987 to require that the RNC get prior court approval before engaging in any activities to combat voter fraud.
The DNC argues in this complaint what while these practices are usually done under the rhetorical guise of “ballot security” or “election integrity” programs, “they have but one purpose — to discourage, intimidate, and suppress the vote of individuals” that the Republicans think are likely to vote Democratic. That, according to the Democrats, is why they are usually targeted at minorities and at lower- and middle-income voters, as well as why they may now be targeting those who have had their homes foreclosed.
So that’s the (partial) story of the consent decree.
On November 3, 2008, the RNC submitted a motion to vacate or modify the consent decree that they had entered into with the DNC. That motion led to a long legal battle, and we won (another) round last week:
I’ll just go ahead and quote the court in last week’s opinion (pdf):
The RNC asks that out Court vacate a decree that has as its central purpose preventing the intimidation of minority votes. Where, as here, a party voluntarily enters into a consent decree not once, but twice, and then waits over a quarter century before filing a motion to vacate or modify the decree such action gives us pause.
Yeah, me too. Gives me pause, Republicans.
Hooray! They lost:
We applaud the decision of the Third Circuit Court of Appeals to affirm the extension of the consent decree that has been in place since 1982. As this and previous rulings have noted, Republicans have a history of working to restrict access to the polls, including the illegal targeting of suppression schemes at minority populations.
The primary purpose of the consent decree, as stated by the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, is ‘to prevent the RNC from ‘using, [or] appearing to use, racial or ethnic criteria in connection with ballot integrity, ballot security or other effort to prevent or remedy suspected vote’ and to neither ‘hinder [nor] discourage qualified voters from exercising the right to vote.’
Every Republican argument against a continuation of enforcement was rejected by the Third Circuit. The court found that the consent decree is not a violation of free speech but rather an important tool for protecting minority voters and preventing Republican voter suppression efforts. The Republican argument that because the President, Attorney General and former RNC Chairman are African-American, minority voters would be adequately protected from suppression efforts was previously called “unsubstantiated and offensive” by a lower court, and the Third Circuit wrote that its ‘jurisprudence cannot depend on such assumptions.’ Finally, the Court rejected the RNC’s claim that their so-called ballot security measures are essential to preventing voter fraud. Once again Republican allegations of “fraud” have been revealed for what they are: simple cover for attacks on the right to vote.
Read the whole opinion if you have the time. It’s a concise, factual history of RNC attempts at voter intimidation and caging since 1980. Two highlights, for me:
“The RNC also allegedly enlisted the help of off-duty sheriffs and police officers to intimidate voters by standing at polling places in minority precincts during voting with “National Ballot Security Task Force” armbands. Some of the officers allegedly wore firearms in a visible manner”
This was in 1981. Morning in America! Sunny optimism! The National Ballot Security Task Force..wait, what? How come we never hear about this ugly chapter in the Big Book of Movement Conservatism and the Sainted Ronald Reagan? Party of Lincoln, that’s why, and, also, Dixiecrats.
The RNC made a lot of arguments on why they should no longer be required to receive court clearance on their “voter fraud” fighting activities, but I think this is my favorite, as referenced above, and from the (linked) opinion:
“The RNC’s argument that that the fact that President Obama, Attorney General Eric Holder, RNC Chairman Michael Steele and another RNC leader are minorities justifies vacating or modification of the Decree hardly requires a serious response”
They don’t see skin color, conservatives, except when they’re trying to weasel out of consent agreements or overturn the Voting Rights Act. That’s what’s so great about them, and that’s why you-all are the real racists.
The consent decree expires in 2017.
Yutsano
I believe that’s the judicial equivalent of LOLwut?
BGinCHI
Shorter Kay: Republicans are dicks, law is awesome.
gaz
I think I’ll just hang out at the polls and punch anyone with a hover-round or too much flag memorabilia in the fucking face.
Seems appropriate.
Southern Beale
They’ve just gotten more devious in their voter intimidation tactics. Remember Katherine Harris? And all of those state initiatives to demand voter IDs?
c u n d gulag
The Conservatives can’t win without wedge issues and voter suppression.
They’re running out of wedge issues, so they’re trying to double-down, and hammer through voter suppression bills in as many states as possible.
Their time is running out.
Their ole white voter base is dying out.
The demographics are against them.
They are now like vicious cornered animals.
This election will be the dirtiest and nastiest of all time.
I think we’ll hear a major Republican figure screaming “N*gger! N*gger! N*gger!” right around the time of their convention – maybe even earlier.
AA+ Bonds
Exactly which bright young attorney figured it would be a good idea to imply that because the black guy won anyway, this wasn’t racist
Yutsano
@c u n d gulag: Zandar’s prediction is Memorial Day. I’ll semi-split the difference and say the Fourth of July.
Spaghetti Lee
RNC Chairman Michael Steele and another RNC leader are minorities
Two minorities, people, two! My God, what else could you want?!
Yutsano
@Spaghetti Lee: INORITE?! It’s like their tokens don’t COUNT, or something!
Steve
It’s kind of funny how you can station as many off-duty police officers with firearms as you like to go to minority precincts and look imposing, but two clowns with nightsticks calling themselves the New Black Panthers are the biggest election story of all time.
kay
@AA+ Bonds:
They use it all the time. Everywhere. They also use the fact there are more minority voters now (AA and Latino) but Al Franken shot them down on that when they appeared in Congress, because there are MORE minorities, period, now, so the whole argument is bullshit. The court here did that, too. This court didn’t accept the “more minority voters, so no supression” cooked statistics either.
JGabriel
Ha! That’s legalese for “Get the fuck outta here.”
.
JGabriel
@c u n d gulag:
In the past few decades, I might have downplayed this possibility. After all, even Lee Atwater told us that doesn’t work anymore:
But I don’t think Conservatives care about what works anymore. They’re so frustrated, they’ve got Rush Limbaugh out there shouting “Slut! Whore! Prostitute!” And Conservatives are coming to his defense.
So. I don’t think we can rule out a potential explosion of racist slurs from the GOP anymore.
.
General Stuck (Bravo Nope Zero)
I wish I had the confidence in the current SCOTUS keeping partisan politics out of their future rulings on all these lower court decisions, especially the VRA/consent decree. I just don’t. I have a feeling they are going to put the partisan blinders on and conjure up fantasy for justification, and declare us post racial, with ever increasing federalist leanings, toward state autonomy/rights on a whole host of settled law with progressive outcomes the past 70 to 100 years. While they have the majority on the court.
Right wing politics and activist judging to save the con movement, in order to rescue America from itself has become part and parcel to general pol rhetoric from these folks. If you listen to them closely, and the undertone of what they are saying from their top leaders. They really believe the America as they know, and have known it, is being destroyed, and are likely right, and that is a good thing for many of us. Barack Obama and his Mandate for HCR, is all they see right now. And nothing is beyond the pale toward defeating both, and whatever other boogyman notions the liberals give them. Even sublimating the Judicial Branch for the cause, at it’s highest law making level. It has happened before.
I know our lawyers here don’t want to believe these things, and that is understandable. And dear gawd, I hope they are right, and I am just being paranoid. We will know the direction soon enough. This coming June may be the most important month in a long while in this country, and for the coming election.
kay
@JGabriel:
Oh, God, the idea of relying on what they say is just ludicrous:
2005. How are they doing on that?
I wish it was “look the other way”, as Melhman whines, BTW. That’s passive. Tactics like The National Ballot Security Force are active.
Librarian
I am right now doing research on the Weimar republic and the rise of the Nazis, and the parallels between the Nazi party and today’s Republicans are simply amazing. The GOP is truly today’s equivalent of brownshirts and stormtroopers.
kay
@General Stuck (Bravo Nope Zero):
For my part, I think it’s perfectly valid (and understandable) for you to believe that, because IMO, that’s been your experience. You’re governed by SCOTUS decisions just like lawyers are. You don’t trust the justices, and their actions have led you to that conclusion. As far as I’m concerned, your lack of trust is their problem, and a big one, because all they really have is credibility. If they piss it away, that’s not on you, it’s on them.
General Stuck (Bravo Nope Zero)
@kay:
Thanks. I bet I’m just being paranoid (not the first time), and all this will turn out like the law and its precedents indicate it should turn out.
Roger Moore
@Steve:
Sure, but those off duty police officers are police, and you can bet they’re white, so it’s totally different. Besides, the people they’re intimidating don’t really deserve to vote in the first place, so it’s OK to try to stop them.
Steve
@kay: I think many informed Court-watchers were quite surprised that Section 5 of the VRA survived its latest adventure before the high court.
It still seems likely that the question of when the South has sufficiently purged its legacy of minority voter suppression will be determined not by Congress, but by that unelected black-robed panel.
The Bearded Blogger
@c u n d gulag: @Yutsano: On this topic, I think Obama should put Biden in the state department and pick someone like Raul Grijalva or Linda Sanchez for VP, just to cause a full-blown GOP racist meltdown. At this point, the more their true colors show, the better. (Plus, Grijalva as VP would be a great form of life insurance for Obama)
BGinCHI
@The Bearded Blogger: How about Obama and Keith Ellison?
I’d pay to see that.
Yutsano
@BGinCHI: The FSM does not love me enough nor have I lived anywhere near a good enough life for this to occur.
Linda Featheringill
@Librarian: #16
Yes. Scary isn’t it? The real problem, of course, was that the NSDAP actually got some power and then the problems really started.
One thing I learned from my studies of Germany in the 1930s was that the Nazi Establishment really didn’t like public demonstrations. Demonstrations in the streets caused them to move some of their activities inland [labor camps] and caused them to drop some programs altogether [euthanasia of special needs children].
It’s a good thing to make objections and make them loud and long.
BGinCHI
@Yutsano: How was the Seattle meet-up? Dish it.
JGabriel
kay:
Of course, I hope I wasn’t implying otherwise. I certainly didn’t intend to.
My point in quoting Atwater was to show that outright resorting to the ad hominem of just repeatedly screaming the N-word used to be unlikely, because the GOP’s own strategists conceded that it would lose them votes.
And, as c u n d gulag notes, Conservatives have become so angry and irrational that they don’t seem to care about losing votes anymore. They’ve been racist all along, but tried obfuscate it. If Limbaugh’s open expression of misogyny is any indicator, they won’t be trying to mask their racism any more either.
.
Linda Featheringill
@The Bearded Blogger:
Grijalva is a cute little dumpling, isn’t he? Definitely left of Obama.
rikyrah
thanks for the news, kay
Yutsano
@BGinCHI: Amazingly fun stuff! We had a semi-private room so we could be as loud as we wanted (and we were!) and we had 12 folks show up including a few lurkers which shocked me but I was happy with that! Restaurant was a great choice (thanks CaseyL!) and all in all a great time was had by all.
Jay C
Yeah, possibly: and it will, IMHO, be the death-knell of this year’s campaign, at any rate. And, more likely, for Republican prospects outside the Wingnut Belt for years into the future.
I don’t mean to sound all starry-eyed about how tolerant and post-racial we’ve “become” – ‘cuz racism and intolerance is far from banished from American discourse – but should the GOP finally try “out-N*ggering” the opposition this year, I think they they will complete the job of alienating that remnant of the 73% who might even think of voting for them.
And despite their being generally in-the-tank for Republicans, and addicted to both-sides-do-it/horse-race “reporting”, I think that it is finally seeping into the nearly-impermeable crania of our national media that most of the GOP’s Big Ideas/campaign themes this time around have become significantly unpopular with large swathes of the electorate. Resorting to overt racism in their campaigns (or, at the very least, failing to denounce it) will probably be the final nail in the coffin. Outside of Winger Jesusland, of course…
kay
@Steve:
My feeling is that conservatives didn’t gut it in Congress because they didn’t want that place in history. LBJ put it in, and the GOP took it out. They don’t want that story.
I followed the 2005-6 fight in Congress, and I remember the signing ceremony with Bush hugging civil rights leaders and such. Reid warned they would simply hand it off to lawyers and donors and take the fight to court, and they did.
It’s an amazingly cowardly move. Just disgusting. Too frightened of gutting it in Congress, and not wanting that legacy, so they head to court. “Quiet rooms”, as Mitt Romney might say.
Anyway, now I wonder if the Roberts court wants that: the court that took down the VRA.
It would be a profound act, and it won’t be forgotten.
mothra
If the Roberts court cares about not being remembered in that way, it’s only because what Obama said about Citizen’s United left a mark. They had big plans as a part of the whole “dismantling the entire 20th century” program, and Obama called them out.
DonBoy
Back to the question of caging: remember, these are pretty much the same people who love to tell us that the Post Office can’t do anything right. But they’ll outsource your voting rights to the PO’s ability to deliver thousands of postcards correctly, no problem.
Mike in NC
Authoritarian parties have a natural affinity for things like police, armbands, and firearms. Except when the other side has them, too.
Carl Nyberg
Is there a link missing in this story?
noodler
Thanks for this. I find it fascinating, just fascinating. So much to learn
Jimbo316
@General Stuck (Bravo Nope Zero): The USA was founded as a republic but only for white, male property owners just like England at the time. The Senate was a deliberate compromise to allow the rural, slave states to have the same representation as the more populous non-slave states. This fatal compromise has structured our country’s politics ever since.
Both countries have had reform movements to expand the suffrage; the USA a bit faster than Britain in some ways and slower in other ways (mainly because they have a central government and ours is federal (though the Senate is somewhat like the House of Lords used to be).
cmm
@c u n d gulag:
The odds would be even more in favor of that if Breitbart had not died.
Lex
In a free country, any federal judge worth a damn who found the RNC back before him after the 1982 consent decree would have told both the RNC and its lawyers they had one hour to go home and get their toothbrushes. Eighteen months for contempt of court sounds about right.
NCSteve
Nothing says “Freedom” like a guy with a gun wearing an armband.