SAN ANTONIO - It'll be a busy summer for attorneys representing multiple plaintiffs suing the Texas Legislature and for the office of Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott, which represents the state in two voting-related lawsuits.

They'll be in and out of two federal courthouses, first in San Antonio and then in Corpus Christi.

The same San Antonio court refereeing the three-year redistricting fight that resumes Monday is scheduled to begin a second trial Aug. 11.

The first trial will focus on the constitutionality of the Texas House districts the Republican-dominated Legislature approved in the 2011 session.

The latter is on the congressional maps approved at the same time, both under the strong objections of the Democratic minority and civil rights groups.

In addition, in early September, a court in Corpus Christi begins a trial that should decide whether the law requiring Texas voters to show state or federal government-issued photo identification before casting a ballot is constitutional.

As has happened with the redistricting fight, the Texas voter ID fight is expected to get national attention because two years ago a three-judge federal court in Washington ruled the 2011 legislation unconstitutional. The panel said the requirement hurts the elderly, the poor and racial minorities.

"The state of Texas enacted a voter ID law that - at least to our knowledge - is the most stringent in the country," the court wrote in its 56-page opinion.

"It imposes strict, unforgiving burdens on the poor and racial minorities in Texas disproportionately likely to live in poverty," part of the opinion read. "And crucially, the Texas Legislature defeated several amendments that could have made this a far closer case."

In short, call it the summer of litigation.

This is also happening in other states, especially with recently enacted voter ID laws. A North Carolina judge, for example, is expected to rule whether portions of the state's law should be implemented or delayed.

The North Carolina law, which is scheduled to go into effect in 2016 unless the courts declare it unconstitutional, would also eliminate same-day registration and would reduce the early voting period from 17 to 10 days.

As in the case of Texas, the U.S. Department of Justice has sided with the North Carolina plaintiffs.

"The state legislature took extremely aggressive steps to curtail the voting rights of African-Americans," Attorney General Eric Holder said when the lawsuit was announced in September. "This is an intentional step to break a system that was working and it defies common sense."

Although the outcome of North Carolina's legal fight remains to be seen, two months ago the governor of Pennsylvania said he would not appeal a court ruling that struck down the state's voter ID law enacted in 2012, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Moreover, though in late April a federal judge struck down a similar law in Wisconsin, that law can remain in effect while the state appeals the ruling.

In all, Texas and 33 other states have passed laws requiring their voters to show government-issued photo identification before casting a ballot and 31 already enforce it, according to the conference.

"Proponents see increasing requirements for identification as a way to prevent in-person voter impersonation and increase public confidence in the election process," the organization posted on its website. "Opponents say there is little fraud of this kind, and the burden on voters unduly restricts the right to vote and imposes unnecessary costs and administrative burdens on elections administrators."

In political terms, Democrats have long argued that Republicans push for voter ID laws with the intent of disenfranchising minority voters - who vote overwhelmingly Democratic - while Republicans counter that such laws protect the integrity of the vote.

This is the same attitude reflected on both sides of the aisle in the Texas Legislature.

"I believe we passed a good bill," said Sen. Kel Seliger, R-Amarillo. "There was never the slightest intent to suppress anybody's right to vote."

Rep. Charles Perry, R-Lubbock, said the Texas voter ID law is on solid legal ground.

"It is patterned after laws other states have passed and work," Perry said. "I don't think there is any proof that it discourages voter turnout, or, that it disenfranchises anybody."

Democrats, on the other hand, continue to make the case that, as in the cased of redistricting, the voter ID law will hurt hundreds of thousands of Texans in the Nov. 4 election because there is a much higher turnout than in the primaries.

"This is voter suppression and we intend to prove that in court," said Rep. Trey Martinez Fischer, D-San Antonio, a leading opponent of the voter ID and redistricting bills the Republican supermajority approved three years ago. "This is a solution in search of a problem."

About the only thing both sides agree on is they hope the redistricting and voter ID litigation will soon be over.

"We are already four years into this decade and we're still fighting these maps," Martinez Fischer said in a recent interview. "This is something that has already been litigated twice and we're still litigating it."

enrique.rangel@morris.com

• (512) 673-7553