Ruling that found part of Texas vote harvesting law unconstitutional temporarily blocked

click to enlarge

Twitter / @RolandForTexas

LULAC officials hold a press conference last month to ask for a federal investigation into raids Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton conducted in San Antonio and South Texas as part of an ongoing "election integrity" probe.

The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Friday temporarily blocked a federal judge's ruling that said part of a Texas law that enacted new voting restrictions was unconstitutional by being too vague and restricting free speech.

U.S. District Judge Xavier Rodriguez's ruling from Sept. 28 immediately halted the state’s ability to investigate alleged cases of vote harvesting, such as the investigation into the League of United Latin American Citizens by Attorney General Ken Paxton.

Paxton appealed that decision to the 5th Circuit Court, which granted a temporary stay until Oct. 10.

Before the Sept. 28 ruling, a person who knowingly provided or offered vote harvesting services in exchange for compensation was committing a third-degree felony. This meant that organizers of voter outreach organizations and even volunteers could spend up to 10 years in prison and fined up to $10,000 for giving or offering these services.

“Blocking our ability to investigate certain election crimes would have been a serious disruption to the electoral landscape with only a month left before Election Day,” Paxton said in a Friday statement.

According to Republican lawmakers, the provision was put in place to prevent voter fraud and secure election integrity.

But in the Sept. 28 ruling, the judge noted that there was widespread confusion about how to implement the canvassing restriction from local election administrators. This confusion also left voter outreach organizations uncertain about whether they could provide volunteers with food or bus fare because it could look like compensation.

Several organizations — including La Union del Pueblo Entero, LULAC and the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund — have filed lawsuits against many other provisions of the law, including voter assistance and mail-in ballot restrictions. The challenges to these provisions have not been ruled on yet. The original complaints were filed in August and September 2021.

Before the law, organizations like OCA-Greater Houston, an advocacy organization for people of Asian and Pacific Island descent, would host in-person election events and allow attendees to bring their mail-in ballots in order to receive help like language assistance.

Nina Perales, vice president of litigation at MALDEF, wrote of the Sept. 28 ruling that “Today’s ruling means that voter outreach organizers and other advocates in Texas can speak to mail ballot voters about issues on the ballot and urge voters to support improvements to their communities.”

ACLU of Texas had celebrated the Sept. 28 ruling on X saying, “This is a win for voting rights in the state, and for the organizations that help keep elections accessible.

This article originally appeared in the Texas Tribune.

The Texas Tribune is a member-supported, nonpartisan newsroom informing and engaging Texans on state politics and policy. Learn more at texastribune.org.