South Carolina Enacts Emergency Protection for Voting During COVID-19 Pandemic
Action Follows Lawsuit by ACLU and LDF
COLUMBIA, S.C. — In a victory for voting rights, South Carolina took steps today to better protect voters in the June 9 primary during the COVID-19 pandemic. The action comes following a federal lawsuit brought by the American Civil Liberties Union, ACLU of South Carolina, and NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund.
The groups filed a lawsuit last month challenging the state’s failure to take action to ensure all eligible voters can vote by mail during the COVID-19 pandemic. They are challenging a state requirement that forces people who vote absentee to have an “excuse” to do so, as well as a witness requirement for absentee ballots.
The emergency legislation, signed today by Gov. Henry McMaster, affects the June primary specifically. Every eligible voter can now cite the pandemic as an excuse for voting absentee in the primary in order to protect their health and well-being.
The ACLU and LDF litigation continues in order to ensure voter protections are extended through all elections in 2020, given that COVID-19 will continue for months.
The following reactions are from:
Adriel Cepeda Derieux, a staff attorney with the ACLU’s Voting Rights Project. “This is an important victory for South Carolinians who want to vote in the primary without risking their health during COVID-19. We are fighting for this change for the November general election as well, in addition to the removal of the unnecessary witness requirement that continues to force South Carolinians to risk their health in order to vote.”
Susan Dunn, legal director of the ACLU of South Carolina: “We are pleased that the legislature has provided temporary relief to voters, but obstacles remain. The legislation requires a witness signature on absentee ballots which makes voting from a safe social distance impossible for those who live alone. We are asking the courts to close the gap by waiving this requirement and ensuring no one has to choose between their health and their right to vote.”
Deuel Ross, senior counsel at LDF: “No voter should be forced to choose between their vote or their health. We are glad that the South Carolina legislature recognized this fact and took the necessary action to ensure that everyone can vote absentee from the safety of their home for the June primary. This is the relief that our clients sought in filing the case. Still, the work continues to ensure that no voter is forced to break social distancing protocols to obtain a witness for their absentee ballot. Like no excuse absentee voting, blocking the witness requirement is equally vital to ensure safe and fair elections in these unprecedented times.”
The lawsuit, Thomas v. Andino, was filed in U.S. District Court in Columbia, S.C.
Statement: /press-releases/south-carolina-enacts-emergency-protection-voting-during-covid-19-pandemic
Case details: /cases/thomas-v-andino
Voting Rights
Thomas v. Andino
Voting Rights
Thomas v. Andino
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.”