Don’t believe a word of it: It’s all about race.
Despite state officials’ that the closing of 31 Alabama DMVs has nothing to do with race, it is a fact that the closures – mostly in poor, majority black counties – disproportionately hurts Black voters. Period.
Fifty years ago in Selma, the civil rights movement won a hard fought battle to gain the right to register to vote. It took bloodshed in the streets, lives lost, a march to Montgomery, and the passage of the Voting Rights Act to make sure that African-American citizens had the right to vote. It was all about race.
Unfortunately, some things in Alabama never change. When it comes to making sure people can vote, the state of Alabama has on its hands an avoidable problem. Our legislature passed an unnecessary law that put excessive burdens on citizens by requiring them to get a photo ID in order to exercise their fundamental constitutional right to vote — despite the well-known fact that in-person voter fraud is rare.
Now Alabama closes 31 0f 67 Department of Motor Vehicle locations where most people get the most commonly used voter ID, the driver’s license. The majority of these counties in the state that are home to poor and Black people . The photo ID law already disenfranchises voters who are not able to obtain IDs. It has been reported that there are currently 250,000 registered voters who don’t have IDs so are now unable to vote in Alabama unless they either travel outside their county to get a driver’s license or take a burdensome trip to a separate location (which is even harder without a driver’s license!) just for a voter ID. And that disproportionately hurts Black voters.
Before the United States Supreme Court gutted the Voting Rights Act in 2013, Alabama would have had to submit this change for review by the U.S. Department of Justice to determine whether the closure was against the law. The fact that it was implemented without approval is just most recent example of why Congress needs to restore the Voting Rights Act.
Indeed, the very day that Alabama was no longer required to submit voting changes to the Department of Justice, Alabama of the photo ID requirement that had been delayed because of the requirements of the Voting Rights Act. This is all about race and about what communities are most affected by the state of Alabama’s bad choices.
Learn More About 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 ACLU 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’s protections against racial vote dilution. The MHRL prohibits racial discrimination and partisan gerrymandering in local-level redistricting. The ACLU’s 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’s 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
American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona v. RicherAmerican Civil Liberties Union of Arizona v. Richer
We sued elections officials in Arizona to extend the mail ballot “cure” 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. — 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, American Civil Liberties Union, LatinoJustice PRLDEF, Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund, New York American Civil Liberties Union, and Brennan Center for Justice at NYU Law issued the following statement in response to the ruling: “The 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. “The 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. “To put it simply, the NYVRA does not discriminate, it bans discrimination – and in doing so protects New Yorkers’ most fundamental right. “New York is stronger when everyone has an equal opportunity to vote.”