Last year a judge of the Federal District Court quashed the new law. But the Fifth Circuit later had the law come into effect in January while considering the request of the state.
One of the most contentious issues with the new law is that it creates punishments for those who make false statements in their affidavits. A movement that critics of the law believe confuses and frightens potential voters.
In the decision on Friday, the three-judge panel said that the criminal sanctions intimidating voters were "completely speculative". The judges wrote that the legislature had "reached its goal" to pass a new law that would eliminate "all the flaws" of the original.
The case had previously raised the possibility that the electoral process of the state might be put under federal supervision in a process called preclearance. It was a possible legal sanction for Texas after a lower court judge found that the state had deliberately discriminated against minority voters. But on Friday, the Fifth Circuit Committee seemed to be taking the precautionary ruling off the table, ruling that "there is no just basis for subjecting Texas to an ongoing federal election review."
Republican leaders in Texas who have denied that the law discriminates and
"The court rightly acknowledged that when the Legislative Senate passed Bill 5's final session, it obeyed any change that followed the Fifth Circuit According to the original Electoral ID Law, "Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said in a statement. "Preserving the integrity of our elections is essential to maintaining our democracy, and the revised Voter ID bill relieves voters who can not obtain a photo ID."
A lawsuit by plaintiffs – a group of Democratic MPs, individual voters, and blacks , Hispanic and civil rights organizations who sued Texas – probably seemed. You can turn to either the entire Fifth Circle or the Supreme Court.
"Our view today is the same as it has been since the first day of this dispute – the Texas Electoral ID Law is discriminatory," said State Representative Rafael Anchia, a Democrat from Dallas, chairman of the Mexican American Legislative Caucus the plaintiff in the action. "We are unperturbed by today's decision, and we will continue to fight against laws aimed at suppressing the vote."
Kristen Clarke, president and executive director of the Civil Rights Lawyers 'Committee, which is part of the plaintiffs' attorney team, said an appeal was "an option on the table." Richard L. Hasen, an expert on suffrage and law professor at the University of California, Irvine, said that the law The decision seemed to exclude Texas from the preliminary ruling, but he added that the possibility of federal oversight over the electoral process in Texas existed in another case, the controversial litigation, which is now before the Supreme Court.
"But no doubt that's a big blow for those who think Texas needs federal supervision," said Professor Hasen.
Continue reading the main story