• Home
  • About Me
  • Disclaimer

The Researching Paralegal

~ Articles and Research for Legal Professionals

The Researching Paralegal

Tag Archives: Texas

Texas’ Voter ID Law – Challenged Again.

27 Sunday Mar 2016

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Civil Rights, Constitutional Law, Racial Discrimination

≈ Comments Off on Texas’ Voter ID Law – Challenged Again.

Tags

Lyle Denniston, SCOTUSblog, Texas, U.S. Supreme Court, Voter ID

New Challenge To Texas Voter ID Law, by Lyle Denniston, SCOTUSblog

http://bit.ly/1WSr93M

The long-running controversy over a Texas voter ID requirement — a dispute that once kept Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg up all night writing a dissent — returned to the Supreme Court on Friday as challengers sought again to stop the law’s enforcement.  The application (Veasey v. Abbott, 15A999) can be found here; it argued that the law is the strictest in the nation in its demands for identification before a voter may cast a ballot. . . .

Continue reading →

Share this:

  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print
  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window) Telegram
Like Loading...

Seat Belt Use Evidence Now Admissible In Texas.

19 Thursday Feb 2015

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Admissibility, Authentication, Damages, Discovery, Evidence, Motor Vehicle, Negligence, Personal Injury, Product Liability, Relevance, Torts, Wrongful Death

≈ Comments Off on Seat Belt Use Evidence Now Admissible In Texas.

Tags

Comparative Negligence, Contributory Negligence, Damages, Personal Injury, Product Liability, Seat Belts, Texas

TX: Evidence of Seat Belt Non-Use is Admissible to Apportion Responsibility, by Christopher J. Robinette, Torts Prof Blog (with hat tip to Jill Lens (Baylor)!)

http://tinyurl.com/kmbeph9

For years, evidence of seat belt use was prohibited at trial. The Texas Supreme Court changed that rule of law with this case. This ruling will have a major impact on this area of the law. -CCE

The Texas Supreme Court case, which was announced on Friday, is Nabors Wells Services, Ltd. v. Romero. The case (pdf) is here:  Download TX Sup Ct = Seat Belt Admiss  From the opinion:

We hold relevant evidence of use or nonuse of seat belts, and relevant evidence of a plaintiff’s pre-occurrence, injury-causing conduct generally, is admissible for the purpose of apportioning responsibility under our proportionate-responsibility statute, provided that the plaintiff’s conduct caused or was a cause of his damages.

Share this:

  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print
  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window) Telegram
Like Loading...

Courts Block Voter ID Laws — Expect Appeals.

12 Sunday Oct 2014

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Election Laws

≈ Comments Off on Courts Block Voter ID Laws — Expect Appeals.

Tags

Election Laws, FRONTLINE, North Carolina, Ohio, PBS, Sarah Childress, Shelby v. Holder, Texas, Voter ID Laws, Wisconsin

Courts Block Texas, Wisconsin Voter ID Laws, by Sarah Childress, Frontline, PBS

http://tinyurl.com/mu3h2mq

A federal court struck down Texas’ voter ID law on Thursday, comparing it to historical attempts by some southern states to prevent African-Americans from voting in the post-Civil War era.

Separately, the Supreme Court granted a stay in a case challenging Wisconsin’s voter ID law, blocking it from taking effect for the November election.

The decisions come amid a flurry of court challenges to laws states have implemented in the past year that impact how voters are able to cast their ballots in the November election. The midterms will determine which party controls the Senate for the next two years, and several races are incredibly close.

The Supreme Court ruled last month that Ohio can cut its early voting days, and earlier this week, it allowed North Carolina to eliminate same-day registration and ban voters from casting ballots outside of their own precinct.

At FRONTLINE, we’ve been tracking changes to state voting laws nationwide over the last five years. Some of the most significant changes — and court challenges — have come just since 2013.

Texas’ voter ID law, which took effect last year, was considered among the most strict. It required voters to present one of a handful of photo IDs. Those who couldn’t present proper ID risked being turned away at the polls. Obtaining an ID presented an obstacle for some low-income voters who couldn’t afford to pay for the underlying identity documents, such as a birth certificate, which costs $25.

Officials said the law was intended to prevent election fraud, but in-person voter fraud, which the ID requirement would thwart, is rare. A major in the Texas attorney general’s law enforcement division, Forrest Mitchell, told the court that only two people were convicted of impersonating another voter in the 10 years before the ID law was passed in 2012; 20 million were votes cast during that time. In one case, a man attempted to vote as his brother, who was incarcerated. He was caught at the polls. In another, a man voted as his deceased father.

At the same time, by Texas’ own estimate, roughly 800,000, or 6 percent of registered voters lacked a driver’s license or personal ID card, meaning they might not be able to vote under the law. Of those, the state said nearly 11 percent were Latino. It didn’t break out numbers on African-American voters.

Although the law was passed in 2012, it was blocked under a provision of the Voting Rights Act for imposing ‘strict, unforgiving burdens on the poor.’ The court noted that ‘racial minorities in Texas are disproportional likely to live in poverty.’

In 2013, when the Supreme Court invalidated that section of the law in Shelby v. Holder, officials said the law would take effect ‘immediately.’ The Justice Department and civil rights groups again challenged the law in court.

The law was in effect for the first time last year, during which several people were turned away from the polls. They included Floyd Carrier, an 83-year-old African-American veteran who testified against the law in court. Carrier had three forms of ID when he went to the polls last November, but he still wasn’t allowed to vote.

Neither his expired driver’s license or federal veteran’s card, nor his voter registration card qualified under the state’s new voter ID law. And Carrier was born in a rural area and didn’t have a birth certificate to obtain a new state-issued voter ID. In this small town of 1,160, the poll workers knew Carrier, but had to deny him a ballot. Carrier’s son, Calvin, testified that he has tried to obtain a birth certificate for his father, picking up the cost, but the old records have clerical errors that render the document unusable.

In her ruling, which referenced Texas’ entrenched history of discrimination, Judge Nelva Gonzales Ramos of the U.S. Court of the Southern District of Texas found that the law

has an impermissible discriminatory effect against Hispanics and African-Americans, and was imposed with an unconstitutional discriminatory purpose.’ She also wrote that the law constitutes a ‘poll tax,’ a measure implemented in southern states after the Civil War that required voters to pay a fee in order to cast a ballot. Since most African-Americans couldn’t afford the fee, they weren’t allowed to vote.

The Texas attorney general’s office said it would ‘immediately appeal’ the ruling.

Wisconsin’s voter ID law had previously been blocked, but allowed to move forward by a federal appeals court in September. Civil-rights groups challenging the law estimated that roughly 300,000 voters — most of them low-income minorities — did not have an acceptable form of identification. The September ruling also caused confusion because voters had already begun to mail in ballots. Officials announced that those ballots would be thrown out unless voters came back to present some form of ID. The Supreme Court’s ruling means the law cannot take effect for this election.

Share this:

  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print
  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window) Telegram
Like Loading...

Justice Department’s Attempt To Reduce Sexual Assault in Prisons. Will It Work?

17 Saturday May 2014

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Criminal Law, Department of Corrections, Justice Reform, Prison Elimination Reform Act, Sexual Assault

≈ Comments Off on Justice Department’s Attempt To Reduce Sexual Assault in Prisons. Will It Work?

Tags

Department of Corrections, Governor Perry, Joaquin Sapien, Prison, Prison Elimination Reform Act, ProPublica, Rape, Sexual Assault, Texas, U.S. Department of Justice

Sentenced to Wait: Efforts to End Prison Rape Stall Again, by Joaquin Sapien, ProPublica

http://tinyurl.com/n7oytlp

Texas prison inmates report being raped at some of the highest rates in the country, and the problem only seems to be worsening: The three most recent reports issued by the U.S. Department of Justice show stubbornly high levels of reported sexual assault.

But late last month, Texas Gov. Rick Perry wrote a letter to U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder signaling that he’d rather lose federal funds for corrections than comply with new rules under the Prison Rape Elimination Act requiring states to substantially improve detection and prevention of sexual assaults in prisons. . . .

Share this:

  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print
  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window) Telegram
Like Loading...

Appellate Judges Give Advice On Winning An Appeal.

06 Sunday Apr 2014

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, Appellate Judges, Appellate Law, Bad Legal Writing, Brief Writing, Citations, Judges, Legal Analysis, Legal Argument, Legal Writing, Proofreading, Texas Supreme Court

≈ Comments Off on Appellate Judges Give Advice On Winning An Appeal.

Tags

Appellate Briefs, Appellate Judges, Appellate Law, Chad M. Ruback, Dallas Bar Association Judiciary Committee, Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, Legal Analysis, Legal Writing, Texas, Texas Supreme Court

Appellate Judges Tell Dallas Lawyers How to Handle an Appeal, By Chad M. Ruback, Appellate Lawyer

http://tinyurl.com/ousooh9

The Dallas Bar Association Judiciary Committee recently hosted a panel discussion with three prominent appellate judges.  Catharina Haynes is the only federal appellate judge in the Dallas-Fort Worth area.  After years of sitting as a Dallas state trial court judge, she was appointed to sit on the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.  Debra Lehrmann is the only Texas Supreme Court justice from Fort Worth.  Along with Chief Justice Nathan Hecht, she is one of only two Texas Supreme Court justices who began judicial service in North Texas.  After a distinguished career in a large Dallas law firm, Elizabeth Lang-Miers serves as a justice on the Fifth District Court of Appeals, which reviews the cases from Texas state trial courts in Dallas County and five other counties.

The three panelists offered a number of helpful tips for lawyers practicing before appellate courts. . . .

Share this:

  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print
  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window) Telegram
Like Loading...
Follow The Researching Paralegal on WordPress.com

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Search

Sign In/Register

  • Create account
  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.com

Categories

Archives

  • June 2024
  • March 2022
  • January 2022
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • January 2021
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • October 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • May 2019
  • March 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013

Recent Comments

lawyersonia's avatarlawyersonia on In Custodia Legis – Lega…
Eric Voigt's avatarEric Voigt on Top 20 Paralegal Blogs, Websit…
profvoigt's avatarprofvoigt on Research Guides in Focus – Mun…
Make Your PDF Docume… on Make Your PDF Document Edit-Pr…
madlaw291282999's avatarmadlaw291282999 on Using Hyperbole -Are You Riski…

Recent Comments

lawyersonia's avatarlawyersonia on In Custodia Legis – Lega…
Eric Voigt's avatarEric Voigt on Top 20 Paralegal Blogs, Websit…
profvoigt's avatarprofvoigt on Research Guides in Focus – Mun…
Make Your PDF Docume… on Make Your PDF Document Edit-Pr…
madlaw291282999's avatarmadlaw291282999 on Using Hyperbole -Are You Riski…
  • RSS - Posts
  • RSS - Comments

Blog at WordPress.com.

  • Subscribe Subscribed
    • The Researching Paralegal
    • Join 460 other subscribers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • The Researching Paralegal
    • Subscribe Subscribed
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Report this content
    • View site in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar
 

Loading Comments...
 

You must be logged in to post a comment.

    %d