A federal judge in Alabama has issued a preliminary injunction blocking a portion of a new state law that limits assistance with absentee ballot applications. The ruling, made by Chief U.S. District Judge David Proctor, stated that the law violates the Voting Rights Act by impeding the ability of blind, disabled, or illiterate voters to receive help from a person of their choice.
The injunction specifically targets the law's ban on gifts and payments for assistance with absentee ballot applications, deeming it unenforceable for the aforementioned groups of voters. While this injunction only affects a portion of the law, the majority of the legislation, which includes restrictions on distributing prefilled absentee ballot applications and exchanging payments or gifts related to ballot assistance, remains in effect.
Alabama Attorney General's office has indicated its intention to appeal the decision. The law, originally known as Senate Bill 1, has faced challenges from voter outreach groups and is part of a trend in several Republican-led states to impose new limits on voter assistance.
The lawsuit against the law was filed by organizations including the American Civil Liberties Union of Alabama, the Legal Defense Fund, Alabama Disabilities Advocacy Program, and the Campaign Legal Center. They argued that the law could hinder their efforts to assist disabled voters with applications, as their staff or volunteers providing aid could potentially face prosecution under the legislation.
In response to the injunction, the Attorney General's office defended the law's provisions, stating that while assistance to disabled voters is permitted, it cannot be exchanged for cash or gifts. They contended that these restrictions are necessary to prevent the manipulation of absentee votes by paid operatives.
The ruling has been praised by the organizations involved in the lawsuit, who see it as a victory for protecting the voting rights of vulnerable populations. They emphasized the importance of ensuring that all individuals, including those who are blind, disabled, or have low literacy, can participate in the democratic process without facing unnecessary barriers.
As the legal battle continues, the implications of this decision on Alabama's electoral process and the rights of marginalized voters remain at the forefront of the ongoing debate surrounding voting laws and accessibility.
