[JURIST] On Thursday, Michigan Attorney General spokesman John Sellek said that Michigan Attorney General Bill Schuette and Secretary of State Ruth Johnson plan to appeal [Michigan Live article] an injunction [decision, PDF] on the state’s law [law, PDF] eliminating straight-ticket voting. In his 37-page decision, Eastern District of Michigan Southern Division [official website] Judge Gershwin A. Drain enjoined enforcement of the law, stating that the ban on straight-ticket voting, which violates Equal Protection and the Voting Rights Act [law, PDF], is “caused by or linked to social and historical conditions that have produced or currently produce discrimination against African Americans.” The decision relied upon a report which links straight-ticket voting, generally for Democrats, to higher populations of African Americans within a community. Many Michigan Republicans believe the injunction reflects “the corrupt era of party bosses that hasn’t existed for one hundred years” and leaves the state’s citizens with an outdated ballot system. Michigan House Speaker Kevin Cotter stated that “[a]n objective evaluation of the constitutionality of the more modern ballot, already adopted by 40 other states, would have resulted in a very different outcome.”

Voting rights remain a controversial legal issue in the US. Yesterday, a judge blocked [JURIST report] a ballot measure proposing to amend the Illinois Constitution to eliminate the General Assembly’s power to draw legislative districts. Earlier this week, courts in Wisconsin and Texas [JURIST reports] invalidated state voter ID laws. Last month, a three-judge panel upheld [JURIST report] North Carolina’s newly drawn congressional districts. In April the US Supreme Court [official website] upheld [JURIST report] a redistricting decision in Arizona as not discriminatory. Earlier that same month a panel of federal judges rejected a motion [order, PDF] by Representative Corrine Brown [official profile] challenging the current congressional district boundaries in Florida [JURIST report]. In March the Supreme Court heard oral arguments [JURIST report] regarding an election district plan for Virginia’s Third Congressional District. This district was altered in 2012 in a manner that increased the already majority-African American population, and the district court found the plan unconstitutional under the Fourteenth Amendment. In November the court heard oral arguments [JURIST report] in a challenge to the Three Judge Court Act, which requires the convening of a three-judge district court to decide certain important lawsuits such as those concerning voter redistricting. Last June the court ruled [JURIST report] that the Elections Clause of the US Constitution permits the state of Arizona to adopt a commission to draw congressional districts. In April of last year the court threw out [JURIST report] a North Carolina court ruling that upheld Republican-drawn electoral districts for state and congressional lawmakers.