Civil liberties

Illinois ACLU Speaks Out About Proposed Voter ID Law

Josh Kalven — Tue, 28 Oct 2008 07:58:04 -0700

Yesterday, we highlighted GOP State Rep. Bill Mitchell's plan to introduce a voter ID law during the General Assembly's veto session in November. Today, WJBC is reporting that Illinois ACLU's Ed Yohnka quickly opposed the idea:

Yohnka tells WJBC's Beth Whisman the bill intends to keep certain groups from voting. He says a series of surveys show 15 percent of citizens that make less than $35,000 don't have a state ID, 25 percent of African Americans don't have a card, and 18 percent of people over 65 don't have an ID.

Yohnka says there are no documented incidents of voter fraud, and if lawmakers are claiming there are problems, he or she should call the U.S. Attorney.

Indiana Organizers Speak Out About GOP Voter Suppression In Lake County

Josh Kalven — Wed, 08 Oct 2008 07:31:27 -0700

As I explained in my recent summary of the dispute, Republicans in Northwest Indiana have used legal challenges to block "satellite" early voting centers from opening in three minority rich, heavily low-income cities -- Gary, Hammond, and East Chicago. These three polling places have remained closed even as early voting commenced at the Lake County clerk's office in Crown Point (located over a half-hour to the south) and despite the fact that all three towns had enjoyed early voting during the presidential primary.

After winning a a circuit court victory on Monday, labor and civil rights leaders held a press conference yesterday, calling on the Lake County Board of Elections to obey the court order and begin early voting in the three cities. Watch it:

But, hours after the press conference concluded, I got word that District Court Judge Joseph Van Bokkelen -- a Bush appointee -- had vacated the circuit court decision in lieu of a separate federal case pending in his court. The Post-Tribune confirms this:

Lake County Circuit Court Judge Lorenzo Arredondo ruled Monday that the three sites should be opened immediately, though U.S. District Court Judge Joseph Van Bokkelen had set a hearing on the issue for later this week.

However, federal court records indicate Van Bokkelen vacated Arredondo's order Tuesday during a conference call with attorneys in the case.

So it appears there won't be any further legal developments until he takes up the case on Friday.

Meanwhile, in an Indianapolis Star article yesterday, an attorney for the GOP side argued that opening the three satellite offices would be unfair to Republicans:

David Brooks, an Indianapolis attorney who represents Lake County Republicans, said his clients want a temporary restraining order to block usage of the satellite offices, which they believe give Democrats an unfair advantage.

"The issue isn't whether there's more opportunities to vote," Brooks said. "It's whether it's fair to everyone. They aren't opening any satellite offices in Republican areas. You have to find politically balanced or neutral locations."

It's a bit strange to see Brooks differentiating between fairness and opportunity. Access to voting booths should be proportional to population -- not to partisan geography, as he suggests. Indeed, over 40 percent of Lake County's population live in Gary, Hammond, and East Chicago, all of which are located side-by-side at the northernmost boundary. Meanwhile, the sole, open early voting center is located in the center of the county, a half-hour drive away for those with cars and much longer for those on public transportation.

How exactly is that "fair" or "balanced"?

Lake Co. Board Of Elections Plans To Wait On Federal Ruling (UPDATED: Federal Hearing Moved Up)

Josh Kalven — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 15:48:50 -0700

Here's the latest info on the early voting dispute in Lake County, IN.

As I already reported, a circuit court judge ruled this morning that the Lake County, IN board of elections could commence early voting at three satellite polling places located in the Gary, Hammond, and East Chicago city clerk offices. The ruling opened up the possibility that the board might open these early voting centers as soon as tomorrow, despite telling District Court Judge Joseph Van Bokkelen last Friday that they would wait until he had ruled on a temporary restraining order filed by the local Republican Party to block early voting in the three minority-rich, Democratic cities.

Now comes news that the Lake County board of elections has informed the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) that they don't plan to begin early voting until at least Thursday, depending on Van Bokkelen's ruling (he's scheduled to take up the case this Thursday).

The plaintiffs in the circuit court case, along with SEIU, are planning a press conference tomorrow. But it's unclear at the moment what their next move is. On the one hand, they could simply wait for the district court hearing later this week. Another possibility: they could file yet another lawsuit in circuit court, this one directed at the Democratic-led board of elections.

More to come ...

UPDATE (6 pm): I'm hearing that the federal court has moved their hearing up from Thursday to tomorrow morning. So what could happen? Judge Van Bokkelen will either grant the GOP's temporary restraining order (thereby blocking the satellite polling places from opening), throw it out, or remand the case to the circuit court (where it apparently should have been in the first place).

UPDATE (9:15 am, 10/7): A clarification: Van Bokkelen apparently doesn't intend to rule on the case during today's hearing. Here also is the Post-Tribune's article on yesterday's developments. Meanwhile, the plaintiffs are holding a press conference at 1 pm at the Hammond City Clerk's office. More on that later.

(Full disclosure: Progress Illinois is sponsored by the SEIU Illinois State Council)

Judge Rules That Lake Co. Satellite Voting Can Commence

Josh Kalven — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 12:08:10 -0700

On Saturday, I laid out the basis for the voters' rights battle brewing in Lake County, IN. Essentially, the GOP apparatus there is trying to block efforts to open up early voting centers in three populous, minority-rich cities on the northern edge of the county -- Gary, Hammond, and East Chicago. Instead, the Republicans want voters in those areas to travel south to Crown Point, where the sole early voting center is currently located.

On Friday, a federal judge scheduled an October 9 hearing to consider the GOP's temporary restraining order (TRO) seeking to block early voting in the three northern locations. He also got an agreement from the county board of elections to hold off on opening those voting centers until he had ruled on the TRO.

However, new developments today may lead the board to open early voting in the three cities in the next 24 hours.

According to sources in Lake County, a group of plaintiffs filed a separate lawsuit in Indiana Circuit Court this morning asserting that the ongoing early voting in Crown Point -- but not in Gary, Hammond, and East Chicago -- represented a violation of the state constitution. Judge Lorenzo Arredondo agreed and today approved a TRO instructing early voting to commence in these three locales. The plaintiffs included the local steelworkers and teachers unions, along with State Sen. Earline Rogers and a county resident.

Considering that the federal hearing is delayed until Thursday, it's unclear what exactly is going to happen. But I hear that it's possible the three satellite locations will open as early as tomorrow.

There's also some interesting backstory to this. As Blue Indiana explained yesterday, the GOP should have filed their original TRO in Arredondo's court, but instead submitted it to the superior court, where a friendlier judge presided. Not surprisingly, the board of elections quickly moved to have the case transferred to federal court, where the judge who scheduled the Thursday hearing "was apparently not amused" and quickly vacated the superior court's approval of the TRO. It appears Arredondo wasn't all that amused himself.

The plaintiffs and lawyers are scheduled to hold a press conference on the matter tomorrow. We'll have more developments as they arise.

Civil Rights Groups Make Final Push To Register Ex-Offenders

Angela Caputo — Wed, 24 Sep 2008 08:53:25 -0700

With a handful of states too close to call, few votes are being taken for granted in the lead-up to Election Day. In the rush to get ahead of voter registration deadlines, civil rights advocates are hoping to enfranchise an unlikely group of voters come November: Ex-offenders.

A state-by-state campaign is underway to get thousands of ex-offenders on the voting rolls, Stateline.org reports:

Both in little-contested states such as Texas and in perennial presidential-election battlegrounds such as Ohio, activists are knocking on doors trying to find former prisoners and inform them of their voting rights, visiting state prisons and jails to speak with soon-to-be-released inmates and helping to register those who are interested and allowed to vote.

The theory that ex-offenders could have an impact on the election's outcome is not a stretch. It's happened before. Just look at the 2000 presidential election where by targeting ex-offenders, Florida Republicans purged thousands of eligible voters from the rolls. Bush clinched the presidency by a mere 537 votes in the Sunshine State.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has led a nationwide effort -- the Voting Rights Project -- to wage legal challenges against state laws that restrict the ability of 5.3 million ex-offenders and incarcerated people to vote. In July, the organization filed suit against Alabama election officials who have the authority to bar people convicted of “moral turpitude” from voting.

But sometimes the biggest challenge isn't the law at all, said Ed Yohnkers, of the Illinois ACLU. It's fighting perception. Even in the Prairie State, some ex-offenders need a nudge before recognizing that they are eligible to vote. "It's an ongoing misperception, " he said. "It certainly still needs to be challenged."

PI at NRN: Seals Says Dems "Caved" On FISA

Josh Kalven — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 15:38:27 -0700

During the "Future Leaders" panel at Netroots Nation yesterday, Dan Seals said congressional Democrats "caved" by voting for the recent Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act bill:

Anti-Telecom Immunity Group Fourth Largest On Obama's Website

Mose Buchele — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 11:35:58 -0700

Last Thursday progressive supporters of Barack Obama who disagree with his position on legislation before Congress to modify the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) started a group on MyBarackObama.com urging the candidate to "Get FISA Right." According to DailyKos, the group is now the fastest growing and fourth largest group on the website.

At issue is Obama's support of legislation that gives retroactive immunity to those telecommunication companies that helped the Bush administration eavesdrop on Americans in violation of FISA. Many Democratic lawmakers have tried to portray this bill as a "compromise" between Democrats and Republicans. The reality, argued convincingly in this article by The American Prospect's Julian Sanchez, is that the bill amounts to a full endorsement of Bush's warrantless wiretapping program and strips telecom companies of all accountability for their role in carrying out that policy.

Obama has stated publicly that he would prefer not to grant immunity, but he thinks the wiretapping program is essential to national security. The "Get FISA Right" group wants to pressure him to rethink those priorities.

Over the course of the presidential campaign, there's been a lot of talk about how the Obama campaign has created a dynamic online community where tens of thousands of supporters can interact on a daily basis. Regardless of where you stand on this particular issue, the "Get FISA Right" represents a fascinating new development -- a forum on Obama's website where large numbers of supporters are openly disagreeing with him on a specific policy.

And it's growing like wildfire. Membership stood around 7,000 when I came into work this morning. It's now at 8,387.

Closed Exhibit Prompts Accusations Of Censorship

Mose Buchele — Mon, 23 Jun 2008 15:17:40 -0700

Last week, Chicago's Spertus Institute of Jewish Studies shut down its exhibit "Imaginary Coordinates" after museum donors complained that the show portrayed an "anti-Israel" bias. The exhibit had featured maps that conflict with the current national boundaries of Israel. While the curators didn't reveal what specifically had sparked the complaints, they said the decision was based on a desire not to offend members of the Jewish community, its "core constituency." However, many of those criticizing the closure of the exhibit come from the very Jewish community that Spertus claims it did not want to offend.

Blogging at Jewschool, Rabbi Brant Rosen argues that "intelligent exploration and provocative debate is precisely what belongs at a Jewish institution." And at the Sun-Times, columnist Neil Steinberg had this to say:

If the Israeli-Palestinian deadlock teaches us anything, it is the limited benefit of bulldozing forward without regard to conflicting viewpoints. We condemn the Palestinians for feeding their children a narrow view of the world. And then we take a page from them and spike an exhibit because some aspect makes the check-writers uneasy. Shonda fur di goyim. From a Jewish museum, we expect better.

In last week's Time Out Chicago, Lauren Weinberg noted that "Imaginary Coordinates" had been lauded by critics. She went on to draw a contrast with other museums' handling of similar controversies:

When controversy hit New York’s Jewish Museum in 2002 and the Brooklyn Museum of Art in 1999, those institutions acknowledged viewers’ sensitivities but kept their exhibitions—and a meaningful dialogue—open.

Interestingly enough, the Spertus website still proudly displays the glowing reviews received by "Imaginary Coordinates."

Democrats Cave On FISA

Adam Doster — Fri, 20 Jun 2008 10:45:24 -0700

This morning, the House passed The FISA Amendment Act of 2008 by a vote of 293-129. Authored by House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, it was billed as a bipartisan compromise. The Media Consortium's Brian Beutler writes that while it certainly did garner support from both sides of the aisle, calling it a compromise "is a total farce." Salon's Glenn Greenwald agrees. Mark Agrast at the Center for American Progress has more:

Nevertheless, despite these welcome improvements, the bill fails at the most fundamental level to restore the independent judicial check on executive power that the Bush administration has done so much to undermine. Now, instead of determining whether probable cause exists for the issuance of a surveillance order, the FISA Court will be reduced to reviewing the adequacy of the surveillance procedures established by the Bush administration. Instead of evaluating the sufficiency of the assurances that were given to telecommunications companies to obtain their cooperation, the federal district courts in which the lawsuits against the companies have been filed will be authorized to do little more than determine whether such assurances were in fact provided.

Unfortunately, four members of Illinois' Democratic congressional delegation voted in favor of the measure -- Melissa Bean (8th), Rahm Emanuel (5th), Dan Lipinski (3rd), and Luis Gutierrez (4th).

But praise is in order for Democrats Phil Hare (17th), Jesse Jackson Jr. (2nd), Jan Schakowsky (9th), Danny Davis (7th), Jerry Costello (12th), and newcomer Bill Foster (14th), all of whom voted to ensure the civil liberties of Illinoisans.