Arkansans Can Register to Vote Online With Electronic Signature, Federal Judge Rules
A federal judge dealt a victory to Arkansas voters yesterday after ruling that election officials must accept online voter registration applications signed with digital or electronic signatures for the upcoming election.
At a hearing on Thursday, Obama-appointed Judge Timothy L. Brooks ruled in favor of Get Loud Arkansas (GLA), Vote.org and individuals who filed a lawsuit challenging an emergency rule from the Arkansas Board of Election Commissioners that imposed a handwritten signature requirement for voter registration.
The Arkansas Times reported that Brooks ruled from the bench yesterday after acknowledging that the parties are “somewhat under the gun” ahead of Arkansas’ Oct. 7 voter registration deadline. Brooks added that he expects to issue a more detailed written order in the coming days.
According to the lawsuit filed in June, the board implemented the rule in response to an “about-face” by Arkansas Secretary of State John Thurston (R), who had initially advised Get Loud Arkansas that its new online electronic voter registration tool was lawful.
But after hearing about the success of the new tool in registering young and minority voters, Thurston abruptly changed course and urged the board to issue an emergency rule that would require the rejection of electronically signed online registration applications, the complaint explained.
As the suit underscored, Thurston’s move was especially concerning given that Arkansas has the lowest voter registration rate and one of the lowest voter turnout rates in the country, with voter participation especially low among young and Black Arkansans.
The plaintiffs alleged the new pen-on-paper signature rule — also known as a “wet signature” requirement — violates the Materiality Provision of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which protects otherwise eligible voters from disenfranchisement based on trivial errors.
Per the Arkansas Times, Brooks agreed the emergency wet signature rule — which the board planned to implement as a permanent rule starting Sept. 1 — likely violates the Materiality Provision.
Opponents of the wet signature rule argue that it makes voter registration more difficult for those who lack access to a printer or postal services — including individuals with disabilities, young people, senior citizens and residents living in rural areas.
Meanwhile, Thurston and other state election officials maintained in court filings that the rule provides “greater security in the election process” and helps “prevent fraudulent voting practices” without citing any evidence of such issues.
Lawsuits challenging wet signature requirements in Florida and Georgia are currently ongoing in federal courts.
Following Brook’s ruling in the Arkansas case, litigation will continue to determine whether the state will be permanently prohibited from imposing a wet signature rule for voter registration in all future election cycles.