Appeals Court Rules Challenge to Missouri’s Voter ID Law Implementation Can Proceed
ST. LOUIS — An appeals court ruled today that a challenge to the state of Missouri’s failure to provide adequate funds to educate the public and make appropriate preparations to implement its voter ID law can proceed. The voter ID law went into effect on June 1, 2017.
The American Civil Liberties Union, ACLU of Missouri, and Advancement Project sued Missouri over its voter ID law, charging it failed to provide mandated funding for voter education, free voter IDs and birth certificates, and training of poll workers. The case was filed on behalf of the Missouri NAACP and the League of Women Voters of Missouri.
“We should be making it easier for people to vote, not harder. The state is doing the latter by implementing the law without enough funds to do it right, and the court correctly found that our case should proceed,” said Sophia Lakin, a staff attorney with the ACLU’s Voting Rights Project who argued the case. “This is particularly telling given a court ruling earlier this month finding that the state had been issuing misleading ads.”
The law mandates that the state fully fund all costs associated with implementing the law, including all costs for related public education, free voter IDs and birth certificates, and training of poll workers. To date, the state has appropriated just a fraction of the amount necessary to cover these costs.
“Advancement Project national office has been fighting restrictive voter ID policies in Missouri for more than 10 years and we’re pleased about the court’s decision,” said Denise Lieberman, co-program director of Advancement Project’s Power & Democracy program. “Implementation matters. The state of Missouri failed to allocate enough funds to notify voters about the voter ID change. This ruling shows Missouri voters that their rights matter in the eyes of the appellate court. By seeing this case go to trial, the court recognizes it has a role in stopping voter suppression. We look forward to our day in court.”
“Today’s decision is a win for Missouri voters. The court found that Missouri is dodging its legal responsibilities to voters in implementing this voter ID law,” said Tony Rothert, legal director of the ACLU of Missouri.
The lawsuit is Missouri NAACP v. State of Missouri
The decision is at:
More information is at:
Voting Rights
Missouri NAACP v. Missouri
Voting Rights
Missouri NAACP v. Missouri
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.”