Updated Aug. 25, 2017 at 5:30 p.m. with the state's latest filing.

A federal judge in Corpus Christi blocked further implementation of Texas' controversial voter identification law, after finding for a second time that it intentionally discriminates against minorities.

In a court order Wednesday, U.S. District Judge Nelva Gonzales Ramos blocked Texas from implementing portions of the 2011 voter ID law, which was considered to be one of the strictest in the country. And in a striking blow to the state, she blocked entirely a revamp to the law that the Texas Legislature passed earlier this year as Senate Bill 5. The legislation was an effort to appease Ramos and do away with the finding of discriminatory intent.

"Even if such a turning back of the clock were possible, the provisions of SB 5 fall short of mitigating the discriminatory provisions of SB 14," Ramos wrote. The original voter ID bill was passed as Senate Bill 14.

Ramos had previously ruled in 2014 that the law was purposefully discriminatory, but that ruling was appealed to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The appeals court ruled that the law had discriminatory effects, but asked Ramos to reconsider her ruling that it was drawn up with discriminatory intent.

In April, Ramos reaffirmed that ruling, saying the law violated Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, which prohibits discrimination, as well as the 14th and 15th amendments.

In all, Texas' voter ID law has been ruled discriminatory five times — four times by Ramos and once by the 5th Circuit.

Attorney General Ken Paxton appealed the ruling to the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals on Friday, saying the changes to the law had addressed the discriminatory issues the court had found.

"Texas complied with all the changes to the voter ID law requested by the 5th Circuit, which should reverse the district court's misguided ruling," Attorney General Paxton said in a statement. "Voter ID guarantees to Texas voters the opportunity to cast an in-person ballot and protects the integrity of our elections."

Under President Donald Trump's administration, the Department of Justice reversed course on the Obama-era argument that Texas had passed the law to disenfranchise minorities, who tend to vote Democratic. Under Trump, the department has argued that the law was fixed after the Legislature passed the voter ID revamp in May.

Continued discrimination

Ramos said the revamp continued "provisions that contribute to the discriminatory effects of the photo ID law" and "on its face" embodies some of the signs of purposeful discrimination. She specifically pointed to a controversial provision that would increase penalties for lying on a declaration of impediment that would allow people to vote if they did not have one of the six state-approved identification forms.

Ramos said the plaintiffs had already demonstrated they were entitled to a remedy that would eliminate the discriminatory parts of the law and that it was the state's burden to prove that the revamp adopted by the Legislature this spring was a sufficient fix.

The state had not proven that, and Ramos wrote that her decision was made easier by the legislature's choice to build on the existing voter ID law "rather than begin anew with an entirely different structure."

Ramos also criticized the law for not expanding the types of photo IDs that could be used by a person to vote "even though the Court was clearly critical of Texas having the most restrictive list in the country." The state did expand the accepted use of voter IDs from 60 days to four years, she said, but Ramos said there was no proof to show that change reduced the discriminatory effect of the law.

Even the "greatest benefit" of the changes to the law -- allowing voters over 70 to use expired IDs to vote -- did not remedy its discriminatory effects because a majority of that population was disproportionately white.

Ramos also criticized the way the state had changed the use of the declaration of impediments for voters who did not have approved forms of ID. Those voters would have to list a reason such as lack of transportation or work schedule to show why they could not obtain a state-approved ID in time for an election. In its revamp of the law, the state did away with an "other" option, which Ramos said did not "advance the state's interest in secure elections" and took on "added meaning because of the increased penalties for perjury."

She said the removal of that option would cause a "chilling effect" that would cause qualified voters to forfeit their votes out of fear and appeared to be efforts at "voter intimidation."

And while the state's newly passed revamp proposed to provide mobile units that could issue election identification certificates to voters free of cost, Ramos said Texas provided no educational or training programs or funding for such programs.

Ramos said that none of the discriminatory features of the original voter ID law was remedied by the state's newly passed revamp, so she blocked the implementation of the laws "to prevent ongoing violations of federal law and the recurrence of illegal behavior."

The plaintiffs also had asked Ramos to consider placing Texas under federal supervision for further changes to its election laws. If that happens, Texas would be the first to be returned to supervision since a 2013 U.S. Supreme Court ruling allowed several southern states with histories of discrimination out of that supervision.

Ramos did not rule on that request Wednesday but ordered both sides to file briefs stating whether hearings were necessary on the issue.

GOP, Democratic reaction

The state's two major parties took opposing views on the ruling.

Texas Democratic Party Chairman Gilberto Hinojosa said Republicans had kept power in the state through Jim Crow era tactics that "rigged" the state's election system.

"Republicans have done everything in their power to steal Texans' right to the ballot box," Hinojosa said in a news release. "It's wrong, and a federal court has now confirmed it's a violation of the U.S. Constitution and the Voting Rights Act."

Texas Republican Party Chairman James Dickey said in a written statement that "ballot integrity is imperative to a free republic" and must be protected.

"Texans overwhelmingly support voter ID, and we hope the will of the people of Texas prevails over this case of federal judicial activism," Dickey said.

In a tweet following the ruling, Rep. Marc Veasey, a Democrat from the Dallas-Fort Worth area who was a plaintiff in the case, said: "Time and time again courts have ruled that Texas Republican leadership have continued their crusade to undermine voting power of minorities."