Civil rights groups say Georgia’s modern voting rules have made it too uncomplicated to challenge the voting eligibility of people living in nursing homes, college dorms and military facilities, and will make it harder for homeless people to register to vote.
The modern rules are contained in a more comprehensive lawsigned by Republican Gov. Brian Kemp in Maythat makes it easier for U.S. citizens to challenge a person’s eligibility to vote.
The law states that there is probable cause to challenge a person’s eligibility to vote if that person lives at a “non-residential address” – a category that can include shelters, nursing homes, group homes and other places designated as a “non-residential address” under local zoning laws ” apply. according to critics. The provision came into force in July and can therefore be used to challenge people’s eligibility to vote in the upcoming election.
The law also requires homeless people without a lasting address to pick up election-related mail at the registry office in the county in which they live to register. Other Georgians are allowed to receive election-related mail wherever they choose. This provision comes into force in January and therefore has no impact on eligibility to vote in the upcoming election.
Elections lack integrity when eligible voters are disenfranchised.
– Ryan Snow, attorney at Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law
Last month, the Georgia State Conference of the NAACP and Georgia Coalition for the People’s Agenda Inc., a voting rights coalition, filed a motion suit against the state, arguing that the two provisions violated the voting rights of homeless or unstable Georgians.
Homeless people face significant barriers to voting — many of them don’t have photo ID, for example — but most states have rules that allow people without a lasting address to register to vote and cast ballots. Critics say the modern Georgia rules would have the opposite effect and fear other states could copy them.
Ryan Snow, an attorney with the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, said it is critical to challenge the housing provisions “before other states adopt similar ideas, which could result in a full-scale attack on the voting rights of housing-insecure and vulnerable populations.” “ .”
“Elections lack integrity when eligible voters are disenfranchised,” said Snow, who is among the attorneys representing the plaintiffs. “This isn’t about voter fraud – it’s about stopping the ‘wrong’ type of voter from participating.”
In one Press releaseThe committee claimed that the mailing address requirement would affect more than 10,000 Georgia voters — more than half of them Black and nearly a third of them victims of domestic violence.
But Georgia Republican Sen. Max Burns, who sponsored the bill, called it “a testament to our commitment to restoring confidence in Georgia’s elections.” a statement He issued it when Kemp signed it.
In a hearing in MarchBurns argued that the rules designating the local registry office, usually located in the county courthouse, as the mailing address for unhoused people would ensure their participation in the election process.
Republicans in the Georgia Senate declined a request for comment on the modern rules.
A focus
Georgia ready to play again a crucial role in deciding who will occupy the White House has become a flashpoint for election law changes aimed at reshaping the voting process before Nov. 5.
A 2021 law granted Georgia residents less time to request mail-in ballots and added modern ID requirements. It reduced the number of drop boxes and prohibited election officials and nonprofits from sending unsolicited absentee ballot applications to voters.
The law also gave the state election board more power to determine the composition of local electoral bodies.
More than 63,000 Georgians have had their eligibility challenged since the law Kemp signed this year took effect in July, according to a report Analysis by The Associated Press This included any modern rules that came into force for challenging eligibility, not just the rules for people living at non-residential addresses. According to the analysis, around 18,000 voters were turned away in 2023 and the first half of 2024, i.e. before the law came into force. However, fewer than 800 voters have been removed from the voter rolls since July, the news organization found.
Homelessness and elections
A person is not required have a home to choose from. All states require a person to have a mailing address to receive voting information by mail, but it does not have to be a fixed home address. Many states allow homeless voters to provide a shelter, a religious center, a post office box or the address of a friend or relative who lives nearby. Some states allow people to list a description of the place where they live – such as a park or an intersection – as a home address, but not as a mailing address.
A modern Utah lawFor example, homeless people can exploit parks and intersections as voting addresses. Colorado’s voter registration form allows people experiencing homelessness to list a common place where they sleep. Iowa’s registration form instructs voters without a fixed, fixed address: “Describe where you live.” And Ohio allows people without a lasting lasting address to get on the list.”Shelter or another location” as a place of residence.
But numerous obstacles make it almost impossible for homeless people to regularly vote in elections. Some states do not require ID to register to vote, but most states require you to bring ID to vote in person, and many homeless people do not have ID.
“We’ve had voters come in and say, ‘I’m homeless and the only address I can use is a UPS store in a mall because I live in the parking lot with my car,'” said Zach Manifold, the elections director for Gwinnett County, Georgia. Manifold said it was unclear how the modern homeless regime would work, “but the uncertainty it brings is concerning.”
Democratic Georgia state Sen. Derek Mallow expressed concerns that the nonresidential address provision could create barriers for elderly people living in nursing homes and military personnel stationed overseas.
“I have serious concerns about the probable cause of challenging voters, particularly at a non-residential address,” Mallow said. “My grandmother, who owned her house until she died, lived in a nursing home. I would have a problem if someone questioned their right to vote.”
