Become a Votebeat sponsor

Texas can no longer investigate alleged cases of vote harvesting, federal judge says

The provision was included in a sweeping Texas voting bill that was signed into law in 2021.

Yellow forms attached to clipboards with blue pens on a white table.
Voter registration forms at a registration event in Austin, on Sept. 27, 2020. (Amna Ijaz / The Texas Tribune)
This article was first published by The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan media organization that informs Texans — and engages with them — about public policy, politics, government and statewide issues.

A federal judge ruled on Saturday that part of a Texas law that enacted new voting restrictions violated the U.S. Constitution by being too vague and restricting free speech.

The ruling, made by U.S. District Judge Xavier Rodriguez, immediately halted the state’s ability to investigate alleged cases of vote harvesting, such as the investigation into the League of United Latin American Citizens by Attorney General Ken Paxton.

Before today’s ruling, a person who knowingly provided or offered vote harvesting services in exchange for compensation was committing a third-degree felony. This meant that organizers of voter outreach organizations and even volunteers could spend up to ten years in prison and fined up to $10,000 for giving or offering these services.

Paxton on Monday vowed to appeal the ruling.

“A ruling—weeks prior to an election— preventing my office from investigating potential election violations is deeply troubling and risks undermining public trust in our political process,” he said.

According to Republican lawmakers, the provision was put in place to prevent voter fraud and secure election integrity. However, in the ruling, the judge noted that there was widespread confusion about how to implement the canvassing restriction from local election administrators. This confusion also left voter outreach organizations uncertain about whether they could provide volunteers with food or bus fare because it could look like compensation.

Many organizations – including La Union del Pueblo Entero, LULAC, and the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund – have filed lawsuits against many other provisions of the law, including voter assistance and mail-in ballot restrictions. The challenges to these provisions have not been ruled on yet. The original complaints were filed in August and September 2021.

Before the law, organizations like OCA-Greater Houston, an advocacy organization for people of Asian and Pacific Island descent, would host in-person election events and allow attendees to bring their mail-in ballots in order to receive help like language assistance.

Nina Perales, vice president of litigation at MALDEF, wrote that “Today’s ruling means that voter outreach organizers and other advocates in Texas can speak to mail ballot voters about issues on the ballot and urge voters to support improvements to their communities.”

ACLU of Texas celebrated the ruling on X saying, “This is a win for voting rights in the state, and for the organizations that help keep elections accessible.”

The Latest

Translating election materials is complex and costly for municipalities. More statewide coordination could help.

Proposals to give independent and unaffiliated voters a greater voice are popular, but face tough odds in the legislature.

A technical committee will soon review proposed changes to certification guidelines for voting systems. Local officials worry about the potential cost — and the impact on public faith.

The state’s in-house system has limitations that make it impractical for big cities. A committee is looking at commercial alternatives.

The voters were warned they would be moved to the inactive list if they didn’t respond. The Recorder’s Office said it was a printing error.

Groups like Rank MI Vote want the state to adopt the method that was just used in New York City’s mayoral primary.