National Roundup

North Carolina
Judges: More felony offenders can now vote
RALEIGH, N.C. (AP) — Tens of thousands of North Carolina residents convicted of felonies but whose current punishments don't include prison time can register to vote and cast ballots, a judicial panel declared Monday.

Several civil rights groups and ex-offenders who sued legislative leaders and state officials in 2019 argue the current 1973 law is unconstitutional by denying the right vote to people who have completed their active sentences or received no such sentence, such as people on probation. They said the rules disproportionately affect Black residents.

In a brief hearing following a trial last week challenging the state's voting restrictions upon felons, Superior Court Judge Lisa Bell said two judges on the three-judge panel have agreed they would issue a formal order soon allowing more felony offenders to vote. The judges are acting before issuing a final ruling from the trial, as voting in October municipal elections begins next month.

The law says felons can register to vote again once they complete all aspects of their sentence, including probation and parole. With Bell's ruling, felons who only must complete these punishments that have no element of incarceration can register again. The decision also would apply to people convicted of a federal felony in North Carolina but whose current punishment is only probation.

An expert for the plaintiffs estimates that roughly 56,000 people would now be allowed to vote. There are currently more than 7.1 million registered voters in North Carolina, according to the State Board of Elections, which is a defendant along with legislative leaders. They could attempt to block the preliminary injunction from being carried out with an appeal. Otherwise, the State Board of Elections would send letters to those offenders telling them of their ability to vote.

The defendants also could have the chance to appeal any final ruling from the trial judges that expands restored voting rights in the months ahead for the 2022 elections.

The state elections board and legislative leaders did not immediately provide a comment on Monday's decision.

Last year, the same judges ruled a portion of the law requiring felons to pay all monetary obligations before voting again was unenforceable because it made voting dependent on one's financial means. That allowed more people to vote in last November's election.

Bell, the panel's chief judge, said Monday that the majority's reasoning for the injunction would be explained in their upcoming order. The state election board said Monday was its deadline to change language on registration forms for the fall election.

Lawyers representing those who were sued have said the law does not violate constitutional rights because it treats all people convicted of felonies the same by withholding the right to vote.

The current North Carolina Constitution forbids a person convicted of a felony from voting "unless that person shall be first restored to the rights of citizenship in the manner prescribed by law."

Another plaintiffs' witness testified last week that a felony disenfranchisement amendment had origins from a Reconstruction-era amendment he said was designed to intentionally prevent Black residents from voting.

Twenty states automatically restore voting rights for convicted felons when they are released from prison, while about 15 states restore those rights upon completion of their sentence, including probation and parole, according to the Brennan Center for Justice.

Georgia
Judge blocks photography ban in election law
ATLANTA (AP) — A federal judge has found that a part of Georgia's sweeping new election law that broadly prohibits the photographing of a voted ballot is likely unconstitutional.

U.S. District Judge J.P. Boulee on Friday granted a preliminary injunction on that section of the law, meaning it cannot be enforced for now. In the same order, he declined to block a number of other provisions that mostly have to do with monitoring or photographing parts of the election process.

The judge's order came in a lawsuit filed by the Coalition for Good Governance, an election integrity group, and others. Boulee wrote that the plaintiffs in the lawsuit "have shown a substantial likelihood of success on the merits of their claim" that the broad ban on photographing a voted ballot in both public and nonpublic places violates their First Amendment rights.

The  new law, known as SB 202, also adds a voter ID requirement for mail ballots, shortens the time period for requesting a mail ballot, results in fewer ballot drop boxes available in metro Atlanta and gives the State Election Board new powers to intervene in county election offices and to remove and replace local election officials.

There are currently eight federal lawsuits challenging parts of the 98-page law enacted earlier this year, including one filed by the U.S. Department of Justice.

"The Court's striking of the Photography Ban was an important first step in demonstrating that SB202 is an overreach by lawmakers who prefer ballots to be counted behind closed doors, blocking the important oversight of the press and public," Marilyn Marks, executive director of the Coalition for Good Governance said in a statement.

The office of Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, who's a defendant in the lawsuit along with the members of the State Election Board, did not immediately respond to a request for comment Monday. But he has previously said he's confident the new law will withstand court challenges.

While the lawsuit  filed by the Coalition for Good Governance challenges many aspects of the law, including the part that allows the State Election Board to remove county election superintendents, the request for preliminary injunction that was the subject of Boulee's ruling was relatively narrow.

It argued that the provisions in question criminalize normal election observation activities. Lawyers for the state had argued those parts of the law reinforce previous protections and are necessary for election integrity.

Boulee declined to block another photography provision that prohibits the photographing or recording of the face of a touchscreen voting machine while someone is voting or while a voter's selections are displayed.

Among the other provisions he declined to block are ones that: prohibit people from intentionally observing a person who's voting in a way that would allow the observer to see the voter's choices; require that absentee ballots be requested at least 11 days before an election; and prohibit observers from communicating any information they see during absentee ballot processing to anyone other than election officials.