Name: Texas Supreme Court: Lack of immunity to COVID-19 alone not enough to vote by mail
Brand: dallasnews.com
SKU: dallasnews-com-68
Availability: OnlineOnly

critic

Texas Supreme Court: Lack of immunity to COVID-19 alone not enough to vote by mail

preview

5:44 PM on May 27, 2020 CDT — Updated at 7:30 PM on May 27, 2020 CDTUpdated at 7:30 p.m. Revised to include new information throughout. AUSTIN — The Texas Supreme Court on Wednesday ruled that lack of immunity to COVID-19 alone is not a physical disability that qualifies people to vote by mail.The ruling is a victory for Attorney General Ken Paxton, who has argued that only a physical illness or disability that prevents voters from going to the polls should qualify people to vote by mail. It is a loss for the Texas Democratic Party and voting rights groups who had pushed for expanded mail voting during the coronavirus pandemic and had won temporary victories in lower courts.The question of expanded mail voting is also being fought in federal courts, where an appeals court is considering whether to stay an order by a district judge that allowed those who lack immunity to COVID-19 to vote by mail.The two cases are playing out at the same time and the legal battle is expected to continue as both sides argue about how to safely conduct the upcoming primary runoffs scheduled for July 14. Early voting in those elections begins June 29.Related:In the majority opinion from the Texas Supreme Court, Chief Justice Nathan Hecht, joined by six other justices, acknowledged the intense political debate surrounding voting by mail.“The question before us is not whether voting by mail is better policy or worse, but what the Legislature has enacted. It is purely a question of law,” he wrote. “Our authority and responsibility are to interpret the statutory text and give effect to the Legislature’s intent. We agree with the State that a voter’s lack of immunity to COVID-19, without more, is not a “disability” as defined by the Election Code.”Related:Under the state election code, a disability is a sickness or physical condition preventing in-person voting without a likelihood of harm to the voter’s health. But the court, which heard arguments in the case through a video conference instead of in-person as a precaution against spreading the disease, said a lack of immunity to COVID-19 did not meet that threshold against a number of tests.If a “physical condition” means a “physical state of being," Hecht wrote, “it would swallow the other categories of voters eligible for mail-in voting.”“A voter’s location during an election period is certainly a physical state of being. So are age, incarceration, sickness, and childbirth, even participation in a program,” he wrote. “To give ‘physical condition’ so broad a meaning would render the other mail-in voting categories surplusage.”He said if that definition was adopted, “being too tired to drive to a polling place would be a physical condition" and it could not be reconciled with the Legislature’s history of narrowly limiting mail-in voting.Hecht also wrote that a lack of immunity to COVID-19 could not be understood as an abnormal or distinguishing condition or as a condition that “incapacitated by or as if by illness, injury, or wounds.”“Accordingly, we conclude that a lack of immunity to COVID-19 is not itself a ‘physical condition’ for being eligible to vote by mail within the meaning" of the statute, he wrote.The Supreme Court, however, did not grant a request from Paxton to order county elections administrators to reject mail ballot applications from voters who fear contracting the coronavirus.Voters applying for mail ballots can check disability as their reason for seeking to vote by mail. But county elections administrators do not have the authority to investigate or question that answer further. State law essentially places in a voter’s hand the determination of whether in-person voting will cause a likelihood of injury due to a physical condition.“While the State has alleged that the Clerks are accepting “improper application[s],” there is no evidence in the record that any has accepted a faulty application,” Hecht wrote.Hecht wrote that the clerks had assured the court they would follow the law and the Supreme Court’s new guidance. Because of that, Paxton’s request was unwarranted.Still, Paxton celebrated the court’s decision.“I applaud the Texas Supreme Court for ruling that certain election officials’ definition of ‘disability’ does not trump that of the Legislature, which has determined that widespread mail-in balloting carries unacceptable risks of corruption and fraud,” Paxton said in a statement. “Election officials have a duty to reject mail-in ballot applications from voters who are not entitled to vote by mail. In-person voting is the surest way to maintain the integrity of our elections, prevent voter fraud and guarantee that every voter is who they claim to be.”The Texas Democratic Party panned the court’s decision, calling it partisan. All nine justices are Republicans and are elected to the court by Texas voters.“Leave it to the all-Republican Texas Supreme Court to put out 45 pages of opinion and give no guidance to voters about who can vote by mail during a pandemic -- even after under the age of 65 contracted coronavirus last week,” Gilberto Hinojosa, the party’s chairman said in a statement. “This is reflective of Texas Republican leadership that long ago failed to serve Texans’ needs and interests.”Last week, Justice Debra Lehrmann announced that she and her husband had tested positive for COVID-19. On Wednesday, Lehrmann joined the majority opinion.In his statement, Hinojosa said Hecht and three other sitting justices are up for re-election in November. Lehrmann’s term is not up until 2022. In recent weeks, the Democratic Party has stepped up its efforts to publicize its candidates for the court.“Make no mistake, if the federal courts don’t step in, here is the list of people making you stand in line during the middle of this pandemic,” Hinojosa said in his statement, which listed the court’s nine justices.“Now, unless the federal court steps in, because of the Texas Republican Supreme Court, voters will have to either risk standing in line and contracting the coronavirus or they’ll risk prosecution by indicted Texas Republican Attorney General Ken Paxton and his grand juries for simply requesting a mail-in-ballot," he added.Reacting to the news on KTBC-TV in Austin, Gov. Greg Abbott said his office had prepared for safe voting procedures if the court sided with the state. On Tuesday, Secretary of State Ruth R. Hughs, an Abbott appointee, issued guidance to local officials on how to run in-person elections during the pandemic.“I made sure that early voting was going to be extended so that people would have extra time to vote early in ways in which they would reduce their content contact with others, reduce the possibility of contracting or spread of COVID-19 during the voting process,” he said.Get the latest coronavirus updates delivered to your inbox by signing up for our exclusive newsletter.By signing up you agree to our

5:44 PM on May 27, 2020 CDT — Updated at 7:30 PM on May 27, 2020 CDTUpdated at 7:30 p.m. Revised to include new information throughout. AUSTIN — The Texas Supreme Court on Wednesday ruled that lack of immunity to COVID-19 alone is not a physical disability that qualifies people to vote by mail.The ruling is a victory for Attorney General Ken Paxton, who has argued that only a physical illness or disability that prevents voters from going to the polls should qualify people to vote by mail. It is a loss for the Texas Democratic Party and voting rights groups who had pushed for expanded mail...

Texas Supreme Court: Lack of immunity to COVID-19 alone not enough to vote by mail

No article scores yet.

CRITIC REVIEWS

PUBLIC REVIEWS