Post by blackcrowheart on Sept 27, 2006 17:06:55 GMT -5
Navajo woman denied right to vote without ID
By Natasha Kaye Johnson
Din� Bureau
www.gallupindependent.com/2006/sept/092306nkj_novoteid.html
<http://www.gallupindependent.com/2006/sept/092306nkj_novoteid.html>
WINDOW ROCK � An elderly woman from Chilchinbeto, who speaks only
Navajo, was denied a ballot when she went to her chapter house to vote
on Sept. 12.
Agnes Laughter, who was the individual plaintiff in the Navajo Nation's
lawsuit to enjoin the voter I.D. requirements, is one of many Navajo
elders who requires official language assistance at the polls in order
to complete a voting ballot. However, when Laughter arrived at the polls
on Election Day, she was asked for identification by poll workers before
she could even enter the chapter.
After a lengthy conversation with polls workers, Laughter was finally
granted permission to enter; however, she was not given the right to
vote. Because she failed to show identification and told workers she was
not sure whether she could obtain an I.D. within three days, the poll
workers told her to wait outside.
"The law says she could have been given a ballot if she didn't have an
I.D," said Karen Francis, Public Information Officer of the Speaker.
According to written law, Laugher should have been given a conditional
provisional ballot instead of being turned away. Denial of the right to
cast a ballot violates the federal Help American Vote Act, as well as
Arizona's voting procedures.
By law, individuals lacking identification must be given a provisional
ballot. The individual is then given three to five days to return to the
polls with a form of identification.
After hearing about the incident, officials are concerned that this may
have happened to a number of voters.
"From just this one example, it is obvious that the I.D. requirement
creates and undue burden on our citizens who are attempting to
participate in the democratic process," said Speaker Lawrence Morgan.
Because tribal officials feared this situation, the Nation filed suit
against the State of Arizona earlier this year regarding Proposition
200, which requires identification at the polls, asserting that the new
laws are discriminatory and are an unduly burden to Navajo electors'
right to vote. The day before elections, the State of Arizona denied
motions for a preliminary injunction concerning the I.D. requirements
for Proposition 200, but was ordered to submit additional briefing on
its Voting Rights Act and Civil Rights Act claims by September 25, and
will have a scheduled a hearing on the Navajo Nation's Voting Rights Act
and Civil Rights Act on October 19.
Although the Nation sought a separate hearing, its claims were presented
with other plaintiffs suing the state on the same proposition. Other
plaintiffs were also ordered to submit briefs on whether the voter
identification requirements for voter registration constitute a poll
tax.
Tribal officials are hopeful that the state will recognize the situation
that many illegal immigrants are in with voting rights is completely
different when addressing the situation with tribes.
"I don't think they have recognized fully that our claims are slightly
different," said Francis.
By Natasha Kaye Johnson
Din� Bureau
www.gallupindependent.com/2006/sept/092306nkj_novoteid.html
<http://www.gallupindependent.com/2006/sept/092306nkj_novoteid.html>
WINDOW ROCK � An elderly woman from Chilchinbeto, who speaks only
Navajo, was denied a ballot when she went to her chapter house to vote
on Sept. 12.
Agnes Laughter, who was the individual plaintiff in the Navajo Nation's
lawsuit to enjoin the voter I.D. requirements, is one of many Navajo
elders who requires official language assistance at the polls in order
to complete a voting ballot. However, when Laughter arrived at the polls
on Election Day, she was asked for identification by poll workers before
she could even enter the chapter.
After a lengthy conversation with polls workers, Laughter was finally
granted permission to enter; however, she was not given the right to
vote. Because she failed to show identification and told workers she was
not sure whether she could obtain an I.D. within three days, the poll
workers told her to wait outside.
"The law says she could have been given a ballot if she didn't have an
I.D," said Karen Francis, Public Information Officer of the Speaker.
According to written law, Laugher should have been given a conditional
provisional ballot instead of being turned away. Denial of the right to
cast a ballot violates the federal Help American Vote Act, as well as
Arizona's voting procedures.
By law, individuals lacking identification must be given a provisional
ballot. The individual is then given three to five days to return to the
polls with a form of identification.
After hearing about the incident, officials are concerned that this may
have happened to a number of voters.
"From just this one example, it is obvious that the I.D. requirement
creates and undue burden on our citizens who are attempting to
participate in the democratic process," said Speaker Lawrence Morgan.
Because tribal officials feared this situation, the Nation filed suit
against the State of Arizona earlier this year regarding Proposition
200, which requires identification at the polls, asserting that the new
laws are discriminatory and are an unduly burden to Navajo electors'
right to vote. The day before elections, the State of Arizona denied
motions for a preliminary injunction concerning the I.D. requirements
for Proposition 200, but was ordered to submit additional briefing on
its Voting Rights Act and Civil Rights Act claims by September 25, and
will have a scheduled a hearing on the Navajo Nation's Voting Rights Act
and Civil Rights Act on October 19.
Although the Nation sought a separate hearing, its claims were presented
with other plaintiffs suing the state on the same proposition. Other
plaintiffs were also ordered to submit briefs on whether the voter
identification requirements for voter registration constitute a poll
tax.
Tribal officials are hopeful that the state will recognize the situation
that many illegal immigrants are in with voting rights is completely
different when addressing the situation with tribes.
"I don't think they have recognized fully that our claims are slightly
different," said Francis.