United States | Voting restrictions

Back in the booth

A wave of rulings may help the Democrats in November

How many pieces of ID?
|NEW YORK

AWAY from the razzmatazz of the party conventions, federal judges have been making decisions that could have a greater impact on the election. Seven rulings have softened or nullified Republican efforts in several states to tighten voting rules—allegedly to deter fraud, though they also depress turnout among minorities and the poor, who tend to vote Democratic.

In Michigan, where Hillary Clinton has a small lead over Donald Trump, a federal judge ruled on July 21st against a Republican-sponsored law meddling with the layout of the election ballot. For 125 years, Michigan voters have had the option of filling in a single bubble to select every candidate from a given party. Banning this practice, the court ruled, has a disproportionate effect on black voters, who tend to use the straight-party option to vote for the entire Democratic slate. Since it takes much longer to fill in a dozen bubbles, the law will increase “voter wait times…greatly in African-American communities”, potentially deterring them from trying.

This article appeared in the United States section of the print edition under the headline "Back in the booth"

Trailblazers

From the August 6th 2016 edition

Discover stories from this section and more in the list of contents

Explore the edition

More from United States

Bayer wants legislative help to fight its cancer lawsuits

But the maker of Roundup weedkiller faces opposition from Republican and Democratic hardliners

After a season of Gaza protests, America’s university graduates are polarised but resilient

After enduring covid and turmoil over free speech, the class of 2024 finally takes its bow


Can playing cards help catch criminals?

A novel idea for solving cold cases comes with high-stakes risks