Judge Rules NYVRA Unconstitutional, Striking Down Law Protecting Voters Based on Race or National Origin
ALBANY, N.Y. (NEXSTAR) — A judge has ruled it unconstitutional to enforce a law protecting voters based on race or national origin. New York State Supreme Court Judge Maria Vazquez-Doles struck down the John Lewis Voting Rights Act of New York (NYVRA), deciding that such protections represent unequal treatment from the state and violate the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause.
The Ruling
On November 7, Judge Vazquez-Doles ruled from Goshen that the NYVRA didn’t meet strict scrutiny standards for voting measures targeting race-based issues. To pass constitutional review, as in analogous federal laws aimed at historical injustice, such laws must be narrowly tailored and address concrete examples of discrimination—"enumerated justifications."
The Criteria
The judge applied several precedents when deciding the case. She cited "Thornburg vs. Gingles," or Gingles, the 1986 ruling on federal Voting Rights Act criteria establishing vote dilution. The criteria are:
- The minority group must be large and geographically compact enough to form a majority within a reasonably drawn district
- They should demonstrate political unity, showing a cohesive voting pattern
- The white majority must create a consistent voting bloc negating minority influence
The Decision
Vazquez-Doles found that NYVRA’s criteria didn’t meet the standard set by Gingles. Under the court order, the state cannot enforce the law, though the plaintiffs can appeal.
The Impact
The NYVRA is hereby stricken in its entirety from further enforcement and application to these Defendants and to any other political subdivision in the State of New York.
Reactions
The Legal Defense Fund, the American Civil Liberties Union, LatinoJustice PRLDEF, the Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund, the New York Civil Liberties Union, and the Brennan Center for Justice released a joint statement after the ruling.
"The NYVRA does not discriminate, it bans discrimination," they said. “The Nov. 7 decision by a state trial judge is deeply flawed and plainly incorrect. We fully expect the decision to be reversed on appeal. It flies in the face of basic legal principles and constitutes a stunning overreach in striking down the entire law, including provisions that are not at issue in the case."
Conclusion
The ruling has significant implications for voting rights in New York and could have far-reaching consequences for the state’s electoral process.
FAQs
Q: What is the John Lewis Voting Rights Act of New York (NYVRA)?
A: The NYVRA is a law that expanded voting access and prevented discrimination against minorities based on race, ethnicity, or language.
Q: What did the judge rule?
A: The judge ruled that the NYVRA is unconstitutional and cannot be enforced.
Q: Why did the judge rule against the NYVRA?
A: The judge ruled that the NYVRA did not meet strict scrutiny standards for voting measures targeting race-based issues and violated the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause.
Q: What are the implications of the ruling?
A: The ruling has significant implications for voting rights in New York and could have far-reaching consequences for the state’s electoral process.
