President Trump early Tuesday touted an appeals court ruling upholding Texas’s requirement that voters to provide a driver’s license or other identification number for their mail ballot to be counted.
“THIS IS GREAT NEWS!!! Should be Nationwide!!! President DJT” Trump wrote on Truth Social.
A three-judge panel on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit unanimously ruled on Monday the requirement does not violate a provision of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prevents states from denying a person’s right to vote over paperwork errors that are not “material.”
“The number-matching requirements are obviously designed to confirm that every mail-in voter is indeed who he claims he is. And that is plainly material to determining whether an individual is qualified to vote,” wrote U.S. Circuit Judge James Ho, rejecting the argument.
Ho was joined on the panel by U.S. Circuit Judge Don Willett, both Trump appointees, and U.S. Circuit Judge Patrick Higginbotham, an appointee of former President Reagan.
In Texas, voters can vote by mail if they meet certain criteria, like being disabled or age 65 or older.
The state’s Republican-controlled legislature passed the new check in 2021 as part of a broader election integrity bill, S.B. 1. It requires voters to provide a state identification number or the last four digits of their Social Security number on their mail-in ballot application and ballot envelope. Clerks reject ballots that don’t comply.
The Biden administration and several civil rights groups filed lawsuits soon after the law’s enactment.
Texas and the Republican National Committee appealed to the 5th Circuit after U.S. District Judge Xavier Rodriguez Jr. blocked Texas from enforcing the requirement. An appointee of the second former President Bush, Rodriguez ruled that the number-matching requirement violates the Civil Rights Act because it is not material to a voter’s eligibility.
The 5th Circuit’s decision reverses that finding, ruling that the materiality provision only covers voter eligibility determinations and not mail-in ballots.
“The 2021 Act easily complies with the materiality provision in any event,” Ho wrote.
