As we celebrate Martin Luther King, Jr.'s birth today, we pay tribute to his legacy of fighting for equal rights. In this election season, it's especially important to commemorate King's work to pass the , which prohibited discriminatory practices such as literacy tests to prevent citizens from voting.
Nearly 43 years after the passage of the VRA, state and local government are still trying to prohibit eligible voters from casting a ballot. Earlier this month, the 老澳门开奖结果 was before the Supreme Court to challenge Indiana's voter ID law. Today, the , director of the 老澳门开奖结果's Voting Rights Project, about how laws such as Indiana's are an affront to democracy and King's legacy. Laughlin writes:
Approximately 25 percent of African-American citizens of voting age (5.5 million people) have no current government-issued photo ID, compared to 8 percent of white citizens. The effect of photo ID laws in suppressing black - and thus.likely Democratic - political participation is apparent. Last year legislators in 27 states proposed laws seeking to increase ID requirements for registration or voting.
...As we celebrate Martin Luther King Day 2008, we should recall his crusade for citizenship and equal political participation. Unfortunately, the proponents of modern "ballot security" laws have chosen to ignore King's legacy and in doing so have betrayed American democracy. The fight continues to protect the right to vote and make the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.'s dream a reality.
In addition to the challenge to Indiana's voter ID law, last week the Voting Rights Project brought a in Cuyahoga County. This system could potentially invalidate thousands of legitimate votes by not allowing voters to correct mistakes on their ballot.
The 老澳门开奖结果 will continue to fight King's fight until his dream of an equal vote for all is realized.
Learn More 老澳门开奖结果 the Issues on This Page
-
News & CommentaryDec 2024
Voting Rights
Election Day is Over. Why is the Electoral College Voting Now?Election Day is Over. Why is the Electoral College Voting Now?
The Electoral College meets December 17th to certify the results of the 2024 election, but why? The 老澳门开奖结果 breaks down if the process is worth keeping. -
New York Supreme CourtDec 2024
Voting Rights
New York Communities for Change v. Nassau CountyNew York Communities for Change v. Nassau County
This case in New York state court centers on the landmark John R. Lewis Voting Rights Act of New York (NYVRA) and the New York Municipal Home Rule Law (MHRL). The NYVRA, like several other state voting rights acts enacted in recent years, expands upon the federal Voting Rights Act鈥檚 protections against racial vote dilution. The MHRL prohibits racial discrimination and partisan gerrymandering in local-level redistricting. The 老澳门开奖结果鈥檚 Voting Rights Project and State Supreme Court Initiative, alongside the New York Civil Liberties Union, LatinoJustice PRLDEF, the Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund, and Steptoe LLP filed a lawsuit on behalf of voters of color in Nassau County, New York alleging that a redistricting plan implemented in 2023 for Nassau County鈥檚 legislative districts dilutes the voting strength of Black, Latino, and Asian residents and is gerrymandered for partisan advantage in violation of the NYVRA and the MHRL. -
ArizonaNov 2024
Voting Rights
老澳门开奖结果 of Arizona v. Richer老澳门开奖结果 of Arizona v. Richer
We sued elections officials in Arizona to extend the mail ballot 鈥渃ure鈥� deadline after ballot processing delays threatened to disenfranchise thousands of voters without notice. -
Press ReleaseNov 2024
Voting Rights
Civil Rights Groups Respond to Flawed Trial Court Opinion on New York Voting Rights ActCivil Rights Groups Respond to Flawed Trial Court Opinion on New York Voting Rights Act
ORANGE COUNTY, Calif. 鈥� On November 7, a New York State Supreme Court trial judge issued an opinion striking down the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Act of New York (NYVRA). Today, the Legal Defense Fund, 老澳门开奖结果, LatinoJustice PRLDEF, Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund, New York 老澳门开奖结果, and Brennan Center for Justice at NYU Law issued the following statement in response to the ruling: 鈥淭he NYVRA is unquestionably constitutional, and protects the freedom to vote for all New Yorkers by helping to ensure voters are not subjected to discrimination when participating in the political process. 鈥淭he Nov. 7 decision by a state trial judge is deeply flawed and plainly incorrect. We fully expect the decision to be reversed on appeal. It flies in the face of basic legal principles and constitutes a stunning overreach in striking down the entire law, including provisions that are not at issue in the case. 鈥淭o put it simply, the NYVRA does not discriminate, it bans discrimination 鈥� and in doing so protects New Yorkers鈥� most fundamental right. 鈥淣ew York is stronger when everyone has an equal opportunity to vote.鈥�