Appeals court to rehear Texas ID law that was found unconstitutional

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Texas’ voter ID law, which was found unconstitutional last year, will get a second look in a federal appeals court.

The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has agreed to reconsider arguments regarding a law that requires residents to show one of seven forms of identification. A three-judge panel ruled last year that the law violates the Voting Rights Act.

The state of Texas and supporters of the law argue that it prevents fraud, while opponents, including the U.S. Justice Department, say that it discriminates by requiring forms of ID that are more difficult to obtain for low-income, African-American and Latino voters.

Lawyers for Texas argue that the state makes free IDs easy to obtain, that any inconveniences or costs involved in getting one do not substantially burden the right to vote, and that the Justice Department and other plaintiffs have failed to prove that the law has resulted in denying anyone the right to vote.

Opponents counter in briefs that trial testimony indicated various bureaucratic and economic burdens associated with the law — for instance, the difficulty in finding and purchasing a proper birth certificate to obtain an ID. A brief filed by the American Civil Liberties Union cites testimony in other voter ID states indicating numerous difficulties faced by people, including burdensome travel and expenses to get required documentation to obtain IDs.

More On This...

Texas doesn't recognize university IDs from college students, but it does accept concealed handgun licenses as proof of identity.

Despite being struck down by a federal district judge in 2014, the law has been enforced in recent elections. The decision came so close to Election Day that the 5th Circuit panel allowed it to be enforced that year to avoid voter confusion.

In April, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected an emergency appeal to stop Texas from enforcing the law pending the current appeal. But the court said it could revisit the issue as the November elections approach.

An immediate ruling was not expected following Tuesday's court hearing.

The three judges who ruled on the law last year were chief Judge Carl E. Stewart, nominated by President Bill Clinton; Judge Catharina Haynes, nominated by President George W. Bush; and U.S. District Judge Nanette Jolivette Brown, an appointee of President Barack Obama on temporary assignment to the appeals court. It wasn't an all-out victory for the law's opponents, however. The panel rejected some of the lower court's ruling, finding, for instance, that the law did not constitute an illegal "poll tax," as some of the law's opponents argue.

The full 15-member court that will rehear the case includes 10 judges nominated by Republican presidents and five nominated by Democrats.

Based on reporting by The Associated Press.

Like us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter & Instagram