Skip to main content

Federal Court Rules That Virginia Violated Voting Rights of Military and Overseas Citizens

WASHINGTON – The Justice Department announced that a federal district court in Richmond, Va., ruled yesterday that Virginia violated the voting rights of American military personnel and other overseas citizens by failing to mail absentee ballots in sufficient time for them to be counted in the Nov. 4, 2008, general election.

Ruling in a 2008 lawsuit by the Justice Department, U.S. District Court Judge Richard L. Williams declared that Virginia’s failure to mail more than 2,000 absentee ballots at least 30 days prior to the election violated the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act (UOCAVA), a federal law that guarantees military personnel and other citizens living abroad the right to vote by absentee ballot in federal elections.

Judge Williams wrote in his ruling: "The right to vote means a right to cast a ballot that will be counted." As a result, the court held that Virginia’s failure to mail absentee ballots to its military and overseas voters sufficiently in advance of the election "offended these voters’ prized right to vote in a federal election[.]"

To remedy this violation of federal law, the Court ordered the Commonwealth to count all otherwise proper ballots received by the Commonwealth within 30 days after the election. The case will remain open for a determination of what relief is needed to ensure that Virginia complies with UOCAVA in future federal elections.

"The men and women who bravely put their lives on the line to serve their nation deserve, at the very least, to know that their votes will be counted, and their voices will be heard," said Thomas E. Perez, Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division. "I am gratified the Court acted so decisively to uphold the right of those serving our country in uniform and other citizens living abroad to vote, and I applaud the attorneys and staff in the Voting Section for their hard work on this case to protect that right."

UOCAVA requires states to allow uniformed service members and overseas citizens to register to vote and to vote absentee for all elections for federal office. The Justice Department has brought numerous suits under UOCAVA to ensure that voters are not deprived of an opportunity to vote due to late mailing of absentee ballots by election officials.

More information about UOCAVA and other federal voting laws is available on the Department of Justice Web site at http://www.justice.gov/crt/voting/misc/activ_uoc.htm. Complaints about discriminatory voting practices may be reported to the Voting Section of the Civil Rights Division at 1-800-253-3931.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

15 Gang Members Convicted on Conspiracy, Weapons Possession, Firearms Trafficking Charges Case Follows Recent Convictions of 137th Street Crew and East Harlem Narcotics Trafficking Organization

Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., announced the results of the investigation and prosecution of one of Central Harlem’s most destructive criminal street gangs, referred to as “ONE TWENTY-NINE” or “GOODFELLAS/THE NEW DONS,” which terrorized the neighborhood surrounding West 129th Street between Lenox and Fifth Avenues. Thirteen members of the gang have previously pleaded guilty to importing, possessing, and using firearms over the course of the conspiracy.

The Myth, The Matrix, and The Malpractice: Unpacking the Sophia Stewart Saga

The internet loves a good underdog story, especially one where a lone creator battles Hollywood giants. Few tales have captivated online forums and social media quite like that of Sophia Stewart, the woman who famously sued the creators of The Matrix and The Terminator, claiming they stole her work, "The Third Eye." Her story is a complex tapestry woven with claims of stolen genius, judicial conflicts, and attorney negligence. Let's untangle the legal facts from the compelling narrative and examine the heart of her claims. The Core Allegation: "The Third Eye" and the Blockbusters Sophia Stewart alleged that her copyrighted manuscript, "The Third Eye," conceived in 1981 and finalized in 1983, was the blueprint for two of the most iconic sci-fi franchises: The Terminator (first film 1984) and The Matrix (first film 1999). From her perspective, the similarities were undeniable. Stewart’s supporters often point to broad, impactful themes and ev...

Charlie Kirk Was Right, and Charlie Kirk Was Wrong: The Enduring Legacy of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

Charlie Kirk, a prominent conservative commentator, has argued that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was unnecessary, contending that the 14th Amendment should have been sufficient to guarantee equal rights. There's a compelling argument to be made for both sides of this statement. Let's break down where Kirk was right and, more importantly, where historical context reveals he was profoundly wrong. Where Charlie Kirk Was "Right" (In Theory) Kirk's theoretical point hinges on the idea that fundamental constitutional principles, if interpreted and enforced correctly, should have negated the need for additional legislation. And, in a perfect world, he would be correct. The 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868, explicitly states that "no State shall... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." The intent was to ensure all citizens, particularly newly freed African Americans, were treated equally under the law. If this ...