ACLU Challenges California’s Voter Signature-Matching Law
State Rejects Tens of Thousands of Ballots Over Voters’ Handwriting
SAN FRANCISCO — The American Civil Liberties Union and Cooley LLP today sued California for invalidating the vote-by-mail ballots of tens of thousands of voters without warning.
At issue is a state law that allows election officials — who have no handwriting-analysis expertise — to reject a vote-by-mail ballot without providing notice if they feel the signature on the ballot envelope doesn't match the signature on file for the voter.
“People should not be denied their right to vote because a government official doesn’t like their penmanship, but that’s exactly what is happening in California,” said Michael Risher, senior staff attorney with the ACLU of Northern California. “One disenfranchised voter would be too many, and we’re seeing tens of thousands of wrongly rejected ballots every election cycle in California alone.”
Nothing in the law tells voters they have to sign their ballot envelopes in any particular way, and election officials do not have to inform voters that their ballots are being thrown out or give them a chance to correct the signature problem. In California, thousands of eligible voters’ ballots are discarded each election cycle — with approximately 45,000 ballots discarded in the November 2016 general election alone due to a signature mismatch, disproportionately those of Asian American and Latino voters.
The suit asks that voters be notified of any signature concerns and given an opportunity to fix it before their vote is discarded.
“This disenfranchisement of eligible California voters is unconstitutional. Thousands more Californians stand to lose their vote in next year’s elections if this issue is not rectified now,” said Julie Ebenstein, senior staff attorney with the ACLU’s Voting Rights Project.
Nearly 60 percent of the votes cast in the 2016 general election were cast by mail, and more than half the state’s voters are registered to vote-by-mail permanently. This number has been steadily increasing and will likely increase even more in 2018, when some California counties will begin mailing every registered voter a ballot under a new state law.
“The principle that all votes should be counted is the cornerstone of democracy,” said William Donovan, Jr., a partner at Cooley. “This is not a partisan issue, but rather the goal is to ensure that every voter gets his or her vote counted as more and more people vote by mail.”
The lawsuit, La Follette v. Padilla, was filed in the California Court of Appeals/First Appellate Division.
The complaint is at: /legal-document/la-follette-v-padilla-complaint
More information is at: /cases/la-follette-v-padilla
Voting Rights
La Follette v. Padilla
Voting Rights
La Follette v. Padilla
Learn More About the Issues in This Press Release
-
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.”