320 F. Supp. 3d 862
W.D. Tex.2018Background
- Plaintiffs are Texas voters who used DPS's online driver-license renewal/change-of-address portal, clicked that they wanted to register/update registration, but were not given a simultaneous voter-registration application and therefore were (in some elections) effectively disenfranchised.
- DPS and the Texas Secretary of State (SOS) agree DPS is a designated NVRA voter-registration agency and that in-person and mail-in DPS transactions submit a stored electronic signature and voter data to SOS; online transactions do not transmit that data to SOS.
- DPS's online interface asked the voter-registration question but either defaulted to "no" (pre-2013) or merely provided a link to SOS (post-2013), with no simultaneous application or data transfer to SOS.
- Defendants contend Texas election law requires a paper/wet-ink signature for voter-registration applications, which they say prevents using stored electronic signatures for online transactions; Plaintiffs and record testimony show electronic signatures are stored and used for in-person/mail transactions and that technology permits online transmission.
- Plaintiffs sued under the NVRA and the Equal Protection Clause; the court granted Plaintiffs' summary-judgment motion and denied Defendants', concluding DPS's online process violates multiple NVRA provisions and denies equal protection.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Statutory standing/notice under NVRA §20510 | Plaintiffs sent required written notice and gave Defendants time to cure; suit timely | Plaintiffs failed to comply with NVRA notice and thus lack statutory standing | Plaintiffs satisfied §20510 notice; have statutory standing |
| Article III standing / mootness | Plaintiffs suffered concrete injury when denied simultaneous application; post-notice assistance does not moot statutory violation; injury capable of repetition | Post-notice assistance and subsequent registration cure the injury, rendering claims moot and non-redressable | Plaintiffs have Article III standing; controversy not moot; injury redressable |
| NVRA scope and requirements (simultaneous application, duplicate-info, timely transmission) | NVRA requires a single simultaneous motor-vehicle/voter-registration application without duplicate information and timely transmission; applies to online transactions; electronic signatures suffice | State election law (signature requirement) bars using stored electronic signatures online, so DPS cannot provide simultaneous online registration | NVRA applies to online transactions; DPS online process violates simultaneous-application, anti-duplication, and transmission requirements; state law cannot excuse noncompliance; electronic signatures satisfy signature requirement |
| Equal Protection (Fourteenth Amendment) | Denying simultaneous online registration imposes an unjustified burden on the right to vote; burden not justified by state interest | State's signature requirement (and administrative concerns) justify limiting simultaneous registration to in-person/mail transactions | Anderson-Burdick balancing applies; burden is unjustified because electronic signatures are available and no sufficiently weighty state interest shown; equal protection violation found |
Key Cases Cited
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, 477 U.S. 242 (establishes genuine-issue standard at summary judgment)
- Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555 (Article III standing requirements)
- Scott v. Schedler, 771 F.3d 831 (5th Cir. 2014) (NVRA notice/standing principles discussed)
- Burdick v. Takushi, 504 U.S. 428 (Anderson-Burdick balancing for election-law burdens)
- Anderson v. Celebrezze, 460 U.S. 780 (vote-regulation review framework cited)
- Crawford v. Marion County Election Board, 553 U.S. 181 (Equal Protection context for voting regulations)
- Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, Inc., 570 U.S. 1 (Elections Clause and federal preemption of inconsistent state election law)