Eighth Circuit rules against voting rights, with a likely profound impact on Native Americans in North Dakota

Here is coverage of the decision, earlier this month, by Rewire, and here is what High Country News wrote about the North Dakota law, which will require citizens of that state to present state-issued identification cards showing their residential street address in order to vote (a post-office box will not suffice).  Here is an excerpt from the Rewire report by Imani Gandy:

The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals last week upheld a law that strips nearly 10 percent of all voting-age Native Americans living in North Dakota of their right to vote.

The case is as much about local infrastructure and lack of regard for North Dakota’s indigenous population as it is about voter suppression and a state forcing voters to comply with a requirement that the state itself has made impossible to follow. 

Thousands of Native Americans who do not have residential addresses through no fault of their own have been affected by the law, HB 1369. What’s worse is that these Native voters may be disenfranchised permanently should HB 1369 remain in place—something the three-judge panel that ruled on the lawsuit challenging the law seems OK with. That should trouble us all.

The Native American Rights Fund initially filed the lawsuit, Brakebill v. Jaeger, in 2016 on behalf of Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa tribe members. The lawsuit alleges the law discriminates against Native American voters in violation of the Equal Protection Clause and Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.

Gandy further explains the significance of the decision here:

Well, most identification cards do not require a residential street address, but rather a mailing address. North Dakota is the only state to require a residential street address for a voter ID card to be valid. And since many Native Americans in North Dakota don’t have residential addresses—they have their mail delivered to a post office box—North Dakota’s requirement puts them at a disadvantage.

I clerked for a judge on the Eighth Circuit nearly three decades ago, and I'm embarrassed by this decision.   I've also written here about the struggle local governments face in providing addresses in rural contexts.  As I was driving through rural far northern California earlier this summer, I noticed signs in a few communities that urged residents to ensure that their addresses are visible to emergency personnel.

P.S.  A NYT op-ed published nearly a week later on the Native American vote, and how Democrats are increasingly realizing its importance.