Offering no explanation for their ruling, the five conservative justices who hold the majority on the U.S. Supreme Court sided with Alabama state officials Wednesday night in a decision banning curbside voting in the state.
The ruling will bar counties including Democratic-leaning Montgomery and Jefferson from allowing voters with disabilities or who are at risk of severe, potentially fatal Covid-19 infections from remaining in their cars when they go to the polls to vote in person rather than voting by mail.
Sam Spital of the NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund, whose client, Howard Porter Jr., was a plaintiff in the case, called the decision an “outrageous 5-3 ruling that puts Alabama voters at risk.”
An outrageous 5-3 ruling that puts Alabama voters at risk. Our @NAACP_LDF client Mr. Porter, Jr., a Black man in his 70s w/asthma & Parkinson’s testified: “‘[S]o many of my [ancestors] even died to vote. And while I don’t mind dying to vote, I think . . . we’re past that time.’” https://t.co/noJ27SoqXy
— Sam Spital (@SamSpital) October 22, 2020
The conservative majority blocked a district court injunction that simply allowed Alabama counties that are willing to provide curbside voting–which is widely available throughout the country and far safer for high-risk voters–to do so.
— Sam Spital (@SamSpital) October 22, 2020
This decision risks the safety of Alabama voters, especially Black voters, who are disproportionately at risk for COVID complications due to systemic discrimination. And it disrespects the district court, which considered the issues in a 197 pg opinion after 2 weeks of trial.
— Sam Spital (@SamSpital) October 22, 2020
The counties have sought for months to allow curbside voting, in which voters would hand their ballots to a poll worker to avoid having to wait in a crowded polling place and increasing their chances of being exposed to the coronavirus.
Secretary of State John Merrill, who has sought to ban the practice, applauded the Supreme Court ruling and called the decision a victory for “election integrity and security” and for “the people of Alabama” — but the five conservative justices did not explain in their ruling how election security might be threatened by a voter receiving assistance from a poll worker while remaining in their car instead of waiting in a crowd of people during a pandemic.
In her dissent on behalf of the three liberal justices, Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote that the Supreme Court has now flouted public health recommendations by the CDC, which has urged states to adopt curbside voting to prevent the spread of Covid-19.
“This is no radical recommendation,” Sotomayor wrote. “The Department of Justice has sanctioned curbside voting as a remedy to ADA violations, and some 28 States and the District of Columbia already permit curbside voting… The Alabama secretary of state, however, has prohibited counties from offering curbside voting, even for voters with disabilities for whom Covid–19 is disproportionately likely to be fatal. If those vulnerable voters wish to vote in person, they must wait inside, for as long as it takes, in a crowd of fellow voters whom Alabama does not require to wear face coverings.”
Sotomayor also noted that Merrill has never “meaningfully” disputed that forcing voters with disabilities and pre-existing health conditions to vote in person in the traditional manner could prove fatal this year.
The Supreme Court ruling overturned two lower federal court rulings which stated that Merrill’s ban on curbside voting was a violation of the Americans With Disabilities Act, granting state officials a stay of those orders.
Outraged disability rights advocates said the ruling will force people with disabilities “to choose between voting and staying alive.”
Disabled people shouldn’t have to choose between voting and staying alive. https://t.co/5JENCNuelQ
— Margaux Joffe (she/her) (@MargauxJoffe) October 22, 2020
Curbside voting was the safest option for many disabled people. Today, the Supreme Court decided to block it. This is ableist! Disabled people shouldn’t have to die to vote! I’m furious. #CripTheVote #Accessibility #SCOTUS #Disability #ADA #a11y #Alabama https://t.co/YqEgFvrW6d
— Haben Girma (@HabenGirma) October 22, 2020
Kristen Clarke, executive director of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, noted that the conservative justices had ruled from the safety of their homes against voters who aim to protect themselves from severe Covid-19 infections.
BREAKING: By a 5-3 vote, Supreme Court BLOCKS a lower court order that allowed voters in Alabama to cast ballots by way of curbside voting in those localities that sought to make these accommodations available.
Reminder – the Supreme Court is still operating remotely. #COVID19
— Kristen Clarke 866-OUR-VOTE (@KristenClarkeJD) October 22, 2020
“Reminder: the Supreme Court is still operating remotely,” Clarke tweeted.
Truthout Is Preparing to Meet Trump’s Agenda With Resistance at Every Turn
Dear Truthout Community,
If you feel rage, despondency, confusion and deep fear today, you are not alone. We’re feeling it too. We are heartsick. Facing down Trump’s fascist agenda, we are desperately worried about the most vulnerable people among us, including our loved ones and everyone in the Truthout community, and our minds are racing a million miles a minute to try to map out all that needs to be done.
We must give ourselves space to grieve and feel our fear, feel our rage, and keep in the forefront of our mind the stark truth that millions of real human lives are on the line. And simultaneously, we’ve got to get to work, take stock of our resources, and prepare to throw ourselves full force into the movement.
Journalism is a linchpin of that movement. Even as we are reeling, we’re summoning up all the energy we can to face down what’s coming, because we know that one of the sharpest weapons against fascism is publishing the truth.
There are many terrifying planks to the Trump agenda, and we plan to devote ourselves to reporting thoroughly on each one and, crucially, covering the movements resisting them. We also recognize that Trump is a dire threat to journalism itself, and that we must take this seriously from the outset.
Last week, the four of us sat down to have some hard but necessary conversations about Truthout under a Trump presidency. How would we defend our publication from an avalanche of far right lawsuits that seek to bankrupt us? How would we keep our reporters safe if they need to cover outbreaks of political violence, or if they are targeted by authorities? How will we urgently produce the practical analysis, tools and movement coverage that you need right now — breaking through our normal routines to meet a terrifying moment in ways that best serve you?
It will be a tough, scary four years to produce social justice-driven journalism. We need to deliver news, strategy, liberatory ideas, tools and movement-sparking solutions with a force that we never have had to before. And at the same time, we desperately need to protect our ability to do so.
We know this is such a painful moment and donations may understandably be the last thing on your mind. But we must ask for your support, which is needed in a new and urgent way.
We promise we will kick into an even higher gear to give you truthful news that cuts against the disinformation and vitriol and hate and violence. We promise to publish analyses that will serve the needs of the movements we all rely on to survive the next four years, and even build for the future. We promise to be responsive, to recognize you as members of our community with a vital stake and voice in this work.
Please dig deep if you can, but a donation of any amount will be a truly meaningful and tangible action in this cataclysmic historical moment. We are presently looking for 253 new monthly donors in the next 3 days.
We’re with you. Let’s do all we can to move forward together.
With love, rage, and solidarity,
Maya, Negin, Saima, and Ziggy