Reposted by Kevin Morris
The way the one-way ratchet of reactionary power works: They steal the Presidency in 2000, which lets them steal the Supreme Court and federal courts, which lets them rig elections, which lets them steal the legislatures, and on and on it goes until we're in one-party GOP rule in many states now.
2 replies
42 reposts
144 likes
The legacy of the VRA is powerful--and so too is the evidence from the past decade that preclearance is still needed in the 21st century. That's why we need to pass the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act, and bring it back!!
0 replies
10 reposts
58 likes
Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act "flipped the script." Now, states and localities would have to prove that they wouldn't violate the 15th Amendment _before_ a policy could go into effect. Wohoo!
2 replies
5 reposts
37 likes
In the years leading up to the 1965 Act, Congress had expanded the powers of the government to sue over voting rights violations. But it wasn't enough--litigation is time consuming, and localities would often just switch to a new way of discriminating when the old way was blocked
1 replies
4 reposts
34 likes
In SC v Katzenbach in 1966--the SCOTUS opinion affirming the constitutionality of the VRA--the court wrote, "Congress might well decide to shift the advantage of time and inertia from the perpetrators of evil to its victims." That was the power of the VRA
1 replies
4 reposts
34 likes
#ShelbyCounty also allowed states like TX to implement discriminatory policies. And, while we litigate, these laws are on the books and disenfranchising people---laws that almost surely would have been blocked *before* going into effect under preclearance
bsky.app/profile/kevi...
1 replies
9 reposts
50 likes
Of course, that's not all: a half-decade ago, we showed that #ShelbyCounty also drove up the voter purge rate in formerly covered counties
www.brennancenter.org/our-work/res...
1 replies
7 reposts
59 likes
And the effects of #ShelbyCounty on the turnout gap were largest exactly where we'd expect: in counties that tried to implement racially discriminatory policies and practices in the twilight years of preclearance:
1 replies
15 reposts
68 likes
Eleven years ago, SCOTUS gutted the Voting Rights Act in #ShelbyCounty, arguing that "things have changed" since the 1960s. Today, we know that things have changed since this ruling: namely, that the turnout gap exploded in formerly-covered places 1/n
www.brennancenter.org/our-work/res...
4 replies
191 reposts
417 likes
*crosses fingers*
0 replies
0 reposts
2 likes
How could you not be??
0 replies
0 reposts
1 likes
Wait how did I miss how cool the cover art for @emayfarris.bsky.social and @mirya.bsky.social's book is going to be?
(Don't forget to preorder, the actual book is the only thing better than the cover)
press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/bo...
3 replies
2 reposts
12 likes
Today's newsletter from @jbouie.bsky.social has me thinking about our working paper again. JD Vance argues that concerns about fraud should be taken seriously. But that's not true when they're just a means to launder racial anxieties, whether today or in 1876
www.nytimes.com/2024/06/15/o...
1 replies
2 reposts
7 likes
This is one of those figures that will get stuck in my head for months. _Registration_ gaps are dropping for most groups, even as _turnout_ gaps are not
0 replies
0 reposts
3 likes
Seems bad!
0 replies
0 reposts
2 likes
Preliminary results, but weak Dems and weak Reps were more likely to support Dem congressional candidates in CO in 2022 when the Rep candidate was an election denier (using cast vote records)
0 replies
0 reposts
2 likes
Our @brennancenter.bsky.social write up of the results is over here:
www.brennancenter.org/our-work/ana...
1 replies
0 reposts
6 likes
I feel like a @donmoyn.bsky.social bat signal lights up every time someone says "administrative burden" 😆
0 replies
0 reposts
4 likes
Yep you're exactly right!
0 replies
0 reposts
1 likes
We asked whether they could access it easily, in order to register. A lot of folks are like me -- I'm _pretty sure_ my birth certificate is in my parent's safety deposit box, 3,000 miles away from me!
1 replies
0 reposts
3 likes
This morning we published some research showing that millions of Americans couldn't prove their citizenship to register to vote, as some Republicans are demanding. Check out the NPR writeup here:
www.npr.org/2024/06/11/n...
7 replies
57 reposts
84 likes
ICYMI: Last week, Justice Alito cited my @brennancenter.bsky.social research to argue that racial data can't be used to advance or undermine voting rights (?!?!???!). Getting trolled by a SCOTUS justice wasn't on my bingo card for this term
thehill.com/regulation/c...
0 replies
2 reposts
5 likes
This ups the ante on a new preclearance formula: it needs to be perfect, knowing this challenge is waiting in the wings
0 replies
0 reposts
2 likes
Chilling story here from Judge Tatel. While Shelby overturned the formula determining which places were covered under the VRA's preclearance condition, preclearance as a remedy still remains (awaiting a new formula). But in NAMUNDO, SCOTUS nearly killed Sec 5 altogether
www.cnn.com/2024/05/29/p...
1 replies
10 reposts
25 likes
Reposted by Kevin Morris
"Sub-county jurisdictions" might not even be the towns and city council districts you're thinking of. The VRA's preclearance provision was a really important federal defense against racially motivated school district gerrymandering by bad actors.
www.newamerica.org/education-po...
0 replies
17 reposts
54 likes
Here's a great illustration of why the VRA's preclearance condition was so vital: More than 50% of objections (1965--2013) were for sub-county practices. A system protecting a fundamental right _can't_ rely on activists monitoring and potentially litigating this many changes!
0 replies
4 reposts
18 likes
Just a reminder that, uh, "presumptive good faith on the part of the state" isn't exactly little-c conservative
0 replies
0 reposts
6 likes
In case the Justice missed our report from earlier this year, I'm providing it for him here:
www.brennancenter.org/our-work/res...
0 replies
2 reposts
5 likes
This morning saw an awful opinion that will undermine Black political rights in the USA. And yet, Alito recognizes that racial inequalities in participation are endemic in the US. What he left out was that the Court was a major driver of this in Shelby County v Holder
1 replies
1 reposts
4 likes
Cited in a SCOTUS opinion 😃
...
...
...
... in a shitty Alito opinion😠
0 replies
0 reposts
3 likes
Greetings from LA! Looking forward to sharing a nearly-polished draft of our working paper, "The Disparate and Durable Effects of Mail Voting Restrictions: Evidence from Texas." Buckle up for some CRAZY effect sizes 🧵
1 replies
18 reposts
36 likes
Reposted by Kevin Morris
As we wait for results, mainly from WV & MD, my usual election night reminder:
If you prize how bolts is spotlighting local politics, & want us to continue doing this: we're a nonprofit newsroom that thrives on your support! You can become a member: boltsmag.org/donate
1 replies
6 reposts
24 likes
Reposted by Kevin Morris
This TX voting law is terrible, designed to impose burdens in voting. The fact that it has large effects and disparate effects is unsurprising, though its important to see these confirmed, and to see how the law continues to reduce turnout across multiple cycles. responsivegov.org/research/und...
2 replies
27 reposts
67 likes
Finally, a note: these are high efficacy, high turnout voters. They were voting in a midterm primary! 85% had perfect turnout between 2016--2020 generals. These effects would prob be even larger for other voters
0 replies
1 reposts
8 likes
3. Looking at turnout isn't enough. Voters shift to a costlier vote mode after a rejection. In fact, the turnout effects for folks with a ballot rejection was _larger_ in the 2024 primary than 2022 general. Higher C term reduced turnout less in general than the (uncomp) primary
1 replies
3 reposts
7 likes
So, a couple of takeaways:
1. Racially motivated restrictions restrict access for racial and ethnic minorities
2. Looking at the effects of a crappy law in a single election aren't enough; they can have effects for years...
1 replies
3 reposts
10 likes
And in a really perverse outcome, the 2022 primary rejection continued to reduce turnout TWO YEARS LATER by 7--10pts. That's a crazy large effect, if this isn't your home literature
1 replies
2 reposts
9 likes
Oh, but hang on. That _understates_ the costs imposed, since thousands of these folks moved to voting in person if they _did_ vote
1 replies
1 reposts
5 likes
But that's not all; in the 2022 general election, turnout cratered for folks with an application rejection (-16pts). Even for folks with a ballot rejection, it declined among this high-propensity group by 1.5pts
1 replies
1 reposts
6 likes
The effects weren't felt equally across all voters; voters of color had their ballots and applications rejected at considerably higher rates (on ballots, +5pts net of covariates)
1 replies
1 reposts
7 likes
The same thing applies for ballots. But in the 2022 primary, the field was *hidden under the envelope flap.* This led to huge rejection rates; more than 10% of people who started the process were rejected
1 replies
1 reposts
7 likes
First, some background: in 2021, TX passed SB1. Among other things, it requires voters to put either their DL or SSN # on their mail ballot app. The catch? They have to remember which one they used before! Guess wrong, get rejected
1 replies
3 reposts
9 likes
Greetings from LA! Looking forward to sharing a nearly-polished draft of our working paper, "The Disparate and Durable Effects of Mail Voting Restrictions: Evidence from Texas." Buckle up for some CRAZY effect sizes 🧵
1 replies
18 reposts
36 likes
You need to back ALL the way off
0 replies
0 reposts
0 likes