* Somebody didn’t read the entire opinion…
A federal appeals court Friday cleared the way for same-day voter registration to resume in Illinois, tossing a challenge to the new law back to a lower court.
The ruling is likely to have no immediate effect, since the next election is not until the March primaries.
The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals invalidated an injunction a U.S. District Court judge granted last year to former Downstate congressional candidate Patrick Harland, barring implementation of the law.
The opinion Friday stated that, given the amount of time until another election in the state, the injunction was no longer needed and the case’s proceedings in the Illinois Northern District Court could continue.
The suit was filed by the Illinois Policy Institute’s legal wing. Click here for some background.
* The appellate opinion is blisteringly harsh. For instance…
Taking the basic criteria in order, we look first at Harlan’s showing of harm. His case rests exclusively on Hood’s testimony, which we summarized earlier. We conclude that his opinion comes nowhere close to demonstrating that Illinois voters would suffer any harm at all—let alone irreparable harm—under the system set up by P.A. 98‐1171. Hood’s report barely considered the effect of the statute against the backdrop of the rest of Illinois’s electoral system. At best, it gave a 30,000‐foot view of some academic research and a table of votes for the candidates of each major party in statewide races in small and large counties. The district court did not explain how that data related to the question before it. […]
Last, we turn to likelihood of success on the merits. Here, too, we find nothing in this record that supports a finding that Harlan has any realistic chance of prevailing. […]
Perhaps recognizing that it was on thin ice, the district court also concluded that even under rational‐basis review, Harlan had some likelihood of succeeding on the merits. But it provided no support for this conclusion, and we cannot find any in the preliminary‐injunction record. Harlan offers no evidence of discriminatory intent, as opposed to evidence of some differences in treatment.
Ouch.
* The meat…
In light of the minimal harm posed by P.A. 98‐1171 and Harlan’s failure to show a likelihood of success on the merits, we conclude that the preliminary injunction should not have issued. Our view is bolstered by the absence of any consideration of the public interest in the opportunity to register to vote, and to vote. Even though P.A. 98‐1171 does not force quite as many options on the smaller counties as it does on the 20 largest counties, it permits every county to adopt the default same‐day rules, and it provides realistic same‐day options even in the smaller places. This, coupled with the lack of any data about which groups are disadvantaged and how, dooms the injunction. […]
The preliminary injunction entered by the district court on September 27, 2016, is hereby VACATED and the case is remanded to the district court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
- Will Caskey - Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 10:11 am:
I’m starting to suspect the Illinois Policy Institute doesn’t understand the law very well.
- Mr. K. - Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 10:19 am:
—
I’m starting to suspect the Illinois Policy Institute doesn’t understand the law very well.
—
They don’t want to under *the* law. They want to implement their laws.
Time might be running out.
- Winnin' - Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 10:32 am:
The court rules that the think-tank’s thinkin’ is suboptimal.
- Give Me A Break - Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 10:37 am:
Stand by for the email from the IL GOP to their followers asking donors to contribute ASAP as they have gotten word the left is plotting massive voter fraud and only the IL GOP can stop the destruction of America.
- Pesky Laws - Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 10:51 am:
This “law firm” doesn’t have a very good track record. Remember they sued the House and Senate because an IPI reporter didn’t have access to the floor.
- Blue Bayou - Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 10:56 am:
As Mr. K says, they don’t want to have to live with the laws that benefit the whole. They want restrictions based on…..what exactly?
They have endless funding and want to translate it into power. Wonder how they think they’ll do that and how it’s connected to voting.
- Annonin' - Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 11:30 am:
Aw shucks
This was the IPI clown car legal clinic only court “win” Now they are 0 forever
- cdog - Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 11:43 am:
How do we know if same day voters are still registered in another community?
LA County has been busted with 144% registered voters over their eligible voting population.
That’s what I’d call a sloppy database management issue. But hey, if your candidates benefit from the database bloat, you should keep the GIGO theme going. /s
“From public records obtained on the Election Assistance Commission (“EAC”) 2016 Election Administration Voting Survey (“EAVS”), and through verbal accounts from various county agencies, eleven (11) counties in California have more total registered voters than citizen voting age population (CVAP) calculated by the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2011-2015 American Community Survey. This is strong circumstantial evidence that California municipalities are not conducting reasonable voter registration list maintenance as mandated under the NVRA.”
- titan - Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 1:48 pm:
+++ - cdog - Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 11:43 am:
How do we know if same day voters are still registered in another community? +++
The large counties where in precinct registration occurs (and which generally have e-poll books) can generally check against the countywide voter rolls when someone registers in the polling place.
The small counties (where election day registration is centralized) are also able to check against the countywide voter rolls.
As to county to county moves, the state regularly cross checks registrations so as to identify inter-county changes and notifies both counties. It is exceedingly rare that anyone double votes, and the counties get the information needed to turn over for prosecution. The state also keeps check on registration numbers versus population in each county (the figures even used to be part of the published monthly board agenda package).
- Anonymous - Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 2:08 pm:
Part of the problem is that IPI attorneys tend to be young and inexperienced (maybe the pay is low?) and thus are in way over their heads, Their so-called senior attorney has less than ten years’ experience.
- Demoralized - Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 2:10 pm:
cdog:
Voters who register the same day still have their registrations reviewed. It’s not like they come in and register and then go vote and nobody checks anything.
- A guy - Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 2:42 pm:
It’s really time to quit moaning about this and use it to whatever advantage possible for either or both sides.
Jeesh. It’s like betting on a game that’s already been played.
- cdog - Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 5:12 pm:
Titan, interesting and good to hear there are some safeguards in Illinois for inter-county changes, etc.
It seems there is a barn door open, among many other open barn doors, with the inter-state movement of voters.
I have read accounts of postal employees delivering multiple absentee ballots to the same address.
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 5:15 pm:
===I have read accounts of postal employees delivering multiple absentee ballots to the same address===
Cite please. Thanks.
- wordslinger - Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 8:05 pm:
So IPI is against this because of “liberty” or “justice” or something?
Voter suppression has been part of the right-wing game plan since the 1980s.
Paul Weyrich, co-founder of Heritage Foundation, Moral Majority and ALEC, will tell you.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8GBAsFwPglw
- cdog - Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 9:07 pm:
OW,
http://ktla.com/2016/11/03/possible-voter-fraud-being-investigated-in-san-pedro-after-83-ballots-are-mysteriously-delivered-to-one-womans-apartment/
Word, you’re always shooting the messenger. Just because someone favors integrity in the system that legitimizes voters, why does that make them an enemy of democracy and a promoter of voter suppression. You’re off base and going for easy shots. Legal voting is a pillar of a healthy democracy and I would argue that anyone here at CF is pro-democracy. Voter suppression accusations are unearned and cat calls used by people that are up to no good. Be careful who’s junky arguments you buy.
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 9:14 pm:
- cdog -
San Pedro is in California, 83 ballots were found.
So dozens of ballots in a state, not Illinois, that was caught, is reason enough to stop same day voting?
Trump thinks… millions voted fraudulently.
That’s… millions.
This is 83, and caught.
They can catch 83, yet no one has found the millions Trump believes? Um, ok.
- cdog - Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 9:48 pm:
OW, there has not yet been a true reconciliation of voter databases. I do believe there are illegal votes being cast.
We should all care about the sanctity of the voting databases and I can’t condone flippant dismissals of efforts to tidyUp the databases that are based on nothing.
What will it hurt if the nations wide databases and processes are so perfect? Let there be sunshine in this
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 9:52 pm:
===there has not yet been a true reconciliation of voter databases. I do believe there are illegal votes being cast.===
Millions?
How can all this fraud be kept so secret?
All the secretary of states or voter/voting commissioners in America are in on this too?
They can find 83 but not a conspiracy so overblown it overruns all of America… but 83 can be found?
- cdog - Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 10:09 pm:
OW, so you’re threshold for concern is “millions,” “fraud,” and “conspiracy?”
I have to be more proactive in my responsibilities. If all those things happen, millions/fraud/conspiracies, some one isn’t doing their job at maintaining system integrity.
There have been enough hints that the system needs a little work to prevent millions of bad votes.
Btw, no one has scientifically falsified Trumps claims. I personally think there is a possibility he is partially correct.
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 10:17 pm:
===no one has scientifically falsified Trumps claims. I personally think there is a possibility he is partially correct.===
With that, I will leave this discussion.
We live in a country where innocent until proven guilty is the hallmark of claiming things like fraud.
“He may not be wrong” is not how I go about thinking.
You have a California story of dozens. That’s not a nationwide conspiracy proven to be massive fraud.
It’s not. Sorry.
- Demoralized - Tuesday, Aug 8, 17 @ 7:53 am:
==no one has scientifically falsified Trumps claims. I personally think there is a possibility he is partially correct.==
When you go there you lose all credibility. You suggesting that Trump could be partially correct that millions of people voted illegally. Yet, you offer zero evidence besides anecdotes of statistically insignificant incidences of voter fraud. Do I agree we should be shooting for zero? Absolutely. But this notion that massive voter fraud is ongoing - which has been dis-proven time and again with investigations of voter fraud - is just silly. If you believe there is massive amounts of voter fraud then it shouldn’t be that difficult to provide us with proof. You haven’t. Because you can’t.