Federal Judge Blocks Voter ID Requirement for Texas Mail Ballots

[Elderberry]

Texas Scorecard by  Erin Anderson March 24, 2025

Judge Xavier Rodriguez has ruled against several provisions of a comprehensive election integrity measure enacted in 2021.

A federal judge ruled that a Texas law requiring voter ID for mail-in ballots unconstitutionally discriminates against disabled voters.

The challenged measure sought to align voter ID requirements for in-person voting and voting by mail.

U.S. District Judge Xavier Rodriguez ordered that the state cannot require mail-ballot voters to provide an identification number that matches the person applying for a ballot to the person’s voter registration form.

Texas law allows voters who are 65 or older, have a disability, are in jail, or are out of their home county during an election to vote by mail. Plaintiffs argued that disabled voters are disproportionately impacted by the ID requirement.

More: https://texasscorecard.com/state/federal-judge-blocks-voter-id-requirement-for-texas-mail-ballots/

[IsailedawayfromFR]

One more judge that needs removal.

[GtHawk]

How do disabled persons in Texas get their healthcare, here in California whenI go to a new provider or for an Xray or MRI I have to show my insurance card and a picture ID………I’m disabled, the same applies for my 93 year old mother……who is disabled. I don’t believe this is about anything other than protecting the illegal voters.

[MeganC]

One more judge that needs removal.

Removal and then placed on the first one-way mission to Mars.

[catfish1957]

Activist judges is the last line of defense that the left has.

And there is no solution in sight.

[DefiantMassRINO]

They don't want any voter ID so they can count illegals in the 2030 Census and have illegals vote for Dems.

[andy58-in-nh]

Activist judges is the last line of defense that the left has.

And there is no solution in sight.

@catfish1957

There are several potential solutions, all of which may be employed at once:

Congress has the authority to establish courts inferior to the Supreme Court. By extension, they also have to power to limit their jurisdiction or to dissolve them.

The Executive branch and its agencies can appeal court rulings, ultimately up to the Supreme Court.

Both the President and congressional candidates of his party can appeal to voters on the basis of judicial overreach or, as in our time, a coordinated attempt to thwart the will of the people. 

Taking back America from the Progressive Left was never going to be easy. It is going to be a long game, requiring discipline in messaging and an unshakeable will.

[catfish1957]

@catfish1957

There are several potential solutions, all of which may be employed at once:

Congress has the authority to establish courts inferior to the Supreme Court. By extension, they also have to power to limit their jurisdiction or to dissolve them.

The Executive branch and its agencies can appeal court rulings, ultimately up to the Supreme Court.

Both the President and congressional candidates of his party can appeal to voters on the basis of judicial overreach or, as in our time, a coordinated attempt to thwart the will of the people. 

Taking back America from the Progressive Left was never going to be easy. It is going to be a long game, requiring discipline in messaging and an unshakeable will.

Great post, but what you are calling the long game might be over January 6, 2027, if history holds on midterms.

[MeganC]

@catfish1957
Congress has the authority to establish courts inferior to the Supreme Court. By extension, they also have to power to limit their jurisdiction or to dissolve them.

And what happens when the Almighty Courts predictably rule that any limitation to their power is 'unconstitutional'?

What then? Is everyone supposed to just fold and go along with it?

[andy58-in-nh]

Great post, but what you are calling the long game might be over January 6, 2027, if history holds on midterms.

From all indications, Democrats will dramatically underperform in the midterms, due to several unusually powerful historical trends:

The Senate map is very unfavorable for Democrats. Fewer than historical average seats are at risk for Republicans, while some Democrats seats are now in play.

The Republican house majority is thin, but an above-average number of GOP seats are in safe districts, owing to both demographic changes and a prevalence of younger and more popular Republican incumbents. There are only three House Republicans in districts former Vice President Harris won in 2024.

Democrats currently lack a national leader, and those in the ascendancy within their party are popular only within the narrow confines of their own districts, which are disproportionately urban and poor on one hand, or wealthy and highly-educated on the other. They have, at least for now, lost the affection of the middle class voters who decide the outcome of many elections.     

Due to the populist influence of Donald Trump and his MAGA movement, Hispanic, male black voters and younger voters overall are trending conservative and Republican in significant numbers.

People are voting with their feet, and fleeing blue states for red ones. 

[mountaineer]

This is insanity.

[240B]

I am glad to see this. These "Judges" are going so far off the edge that they are screaming for Congressional intervention.
The more loony these Leftist activist Judges get, the more they are forcing Congress to get involved.

[Fishrrman]

Do we really need courts for matters like these?
On the local, federal, or state levels?

I pose these as serious questions.

After a lifetime of observation, I'm coming to the conclusion that ... we don't.
Just get rid of them.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

From all indications, Democrats will dramatically underperform in the midterms, due to several unusually powerful historical trends:

Ain't happening lately in PA, though.


Democrats hold Pennsylvania state House with special election win
https://www.yahoo.com/news/democrats-hold-pennsylvania-state-house-110742365.html

[catfish1957]

From all indications, Democrats will dramatically underperform in the midterms, due to several unusually powerful historical trends:

The Senate map is very unfavorable for Democrats. Fewer than historical average seats are at risk for Republicans, while some Democrats seats are now in play.

The Republican house majority is thin, but an above-average number of GOP seats are in safe districts, owing to both demographic changes and a prevalence of younger and more popular Republican incumbents. There are only three House Republicans in districts former Vice President Harris won in 2024.

Democrats currently lack a national leader, and those in the ascendancy within their party are popular only within the narrow confines of their own districts, which are disproportionately urban and poor on one hand, or wealthy and highly-educated on the other. They have, at least for now, lost the affection of the middle class voters who decide the outcome of many elections.     

Due to the populist influence of Donald Trump and his MAGA movement, Hispanic, male black voters and younger voters overall are trending conservative and Republican in significant numbers.

People are voting with their feet, and fleeing blue states for red ones.

Hope you are right, but the party holding  the WH increases seats during the mid terms less than 10% of the time.   

I am guessing history holds.