Many Americans have a distrust of our electoral system. But this could change everything.
Because a federal court issued an election ruling with dire consequences.
5th Circuit Upholds Texas Mail-In Ballot ID Requirement
On Monday, the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously affirmed a Texas law mandating that mail-in ballots include a state identification number or partial Social Security number, dismissing a challenge from the Biden administration.
Enacted in September 2021 as part of the Election Integrity and Protection Act signed by Republican Governor Greg Abbott, the law voids mail-in ballots lacking the required identification details.
The decision reversed a November 2023 ruling by U.S. District Judge Xavier Rodriguez, who had invalidated the ID provision, and solidified a December pause on that injunction.
The ruling marks a significant moment in ongoing debates over election security and voter access in Texas.
Judge Ho Champions Law’s Alignment with Federal Standards
In the court’s opinion, Judge James Ho, known for his conservative stance, argued that the Texas law complies with the materiality provision of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
“The ID number requirement is obviously designed to confirm that each mail-in ballot voter is precisely who he claims he is. And that is plainly ‘material’ to determining whether such individual is qualified under State law to vote,” Ho wrote.
He highlighted vulnerabilities in mail-in voting, noting that basic voter information, such as names and registration addresses, is publicly available upon request from Texas election officials.
This accessibility, Ho argued, creates a risk of fraudulent ballots being cast with “minimal risk of detection” without stricter verification measures like the ID requirement.
Balancing Election Security and Voter Access Concerns
The Biden administration, joined by groups such as the League of Women Voters, challenged the law, asserting it violated the 1964 Civil Rights Act by imposing unnecessary barriers to voting.
Critics argued there was insufficient evidence to demonstrate that the ID requirement would effectively reduce voter fraud, potentially disenfranchising legitimate voters.
Texas countered that the measure is a critical tool for safeguarding election integrity.
Judge Ho supported this view, stating, “Our precedents compel us to side with Texas. We have made clear that States have a legitimate interest in combating voter fraud, and this enjoy ‘considerable discretion in deciding what is an adequate level of effectiveness to serve (their) important interests in voter integrity.”
