Justice Department Takes Aim at Wisconsin Towns Over Voting Accessibility Failures

Photo byUS Department of Justice

The Justice Department has initiated legal actions against two Wisconsin townships, accusing them of violating federal laws that ensure voting access for disabled citizens.

The Justice Department has filed a lawsuit against the Town of Thornapple, Wisconsin, and the State of Wisconsin, citing violations of the Help America Vote Act (HAVA). The complaint, which centers on the lack of accessible voting machines, marks a significant step in the government’s effort to enforce federal standards designed to ensure that all eligible voters have equal access to the ballot box.

Federal Law and Its Mandate for Accessibility

HAVA, enacted in 2002, mandates that each polling place used in federal elections be equipped with at least one voting system accessible to voters with disabilities. This requirement aims to provide these individuals with the same opportunities for participation as other voters, including the ability to vote privately and independently. However, according to the Justice Department, Thornapple and Lawrence townships failed to meet these basic standards during the 2024 federal primary elections.

Kristen Clarke, Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division, expressed the department’s stance unequivocally. “Our democracy works when voters with disabilities have the right to vote on the same terms as any other voter,” she stated. “By failing to offer accessible voting systems, Thornapple and Lawrence shirked their responsibilities under HAVA to provide equal access to the ballot for all voters.”

A Split Response from the Accused Towns

While the Town of Lawrence quickly agreed to rectify the violations by entering into a consent decree with the Justice Department, the Town of Thornapple has not taken similar steps. The complaint highlights that both towns, in 2023, decided to discontinue the use of accessible voting machines, which had previously been available at their polling places. Lawrence reversed its decision earlier this month as part of its agreement with federal authorities, committing to provide accessible voting machines in all subsequent federal elections and to train staff accordingly.

Thornapple, however, has remained steadfast in its decision, prompting the Justice Department to file for immediate injunctive relief. This motion seeks a court order to compel the town to have accessible voting machines at every polling place for the upcoming November general election. If granted, this would ensure compliance with HAVA, at least temporarily, as litigation continues.

Broader Implications for Voting Rights

This legal battle underscores a broader issue that has plagued the U.S. voting system: accessibility. Despite advances in technology and policy, many voters with disabilities still face significant barriers to participation. The stakes are high not only for residents of these small Wisconsin towns but also for the integrity of federal elections nationwide.

U.S. Attorney Timothy M. O’Shea, representing the Western District of Wisconsin, emphasized the importance of enforcing these laws. “Ensuring equal voting access to all citizens, including those voters with disabilities, is a priority of this office,” O’Shea stated. “We’re pleased that Lawrence agreed to remedy the violations, and we will continue to work to protect and vindicate the voting rights of voters with disabilities in Wisconsin.”

The state's role in these violations is also under scrutiny. The lawsuit claims that Wisconsin failed to ensure that every polling place within its jurisdiction was accessible, a requirement under federal law. This accusation raises questions about the state's oversight and commitment to protecting voting rights for all its residents, regardless of their abilities.

What’s Next for Thornapple and Wisconsin?

With the agreement reached with Lawrence, the Justice Department's focus now shifts primarily to Thornapple and the state government. The ongoing litigation could set a precedent for how strictly HAVA will be enforced moving forward, particularly in smaller jurisdictions where resources and awareness may be lacking. The court's decision on the motion for injunctive relief will be a key indicator of the judicial system’s willingness to uphold the rights of disabled voters in these challenging circumstances.

In the broader context, this case may galvanize further action and scrutiny of how other jurisdictions across the country handle their obligations under HAVA and similar laws. The outcome could serve as a catalyst for more stringent enforcement and compliance measures, reinforcing the principle that the right to vote should be accessible to all Americans.

Your Turn - Like This, or Hate it?

Please offer an insightful and thoughtful comment. Idiotic, profane, or threatening comments are eliminated without remorse. Follow us to have other feature stories fill up your Newsbreak feed from ThumbWind Publications.

Explore Michigan's Thumb and the Great Lakes on our flagship site ThumbWind.com.