Early Wednesday, on the second day of early voting in Georgia, I saw numerous elderly people on walkers and using canes to cast their ballots in DeKalb County. Some of them made use of the curb cuts to get in line. What I witnessed was a direct result of previous votes for politicians who focused on making voting more accessible. And those politicians were compelled to do so by voters with disabilities who made their voices heard.
Unfortunately, we still have politicians and judges who seem intent on making voting more difficult.
Unfortunately, we still have politicians and judges who seem intent on making voting more difficult. The Ohio Supreme Court, splitting 4-3 along partisan lines, sided Tuesday with the state’s Republican secretary of state, Frank LaRose, who issued a rule in August that said voting drop boxes can be used only by people who deliver their own ballots. Voting rights advocates say LaRose’s rule violates a provision of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which says that any voter who “requires assistance to vote by reason of blindness, disability or inability to read or write may be given assistance by a person of the voter’s choice.”
Many disabled voters are immunocompromised and cannot leave their home. Others have difficulty writing their own ballots because they lack limbs or because they are blind. It makes no sense to prevent people who may help them complete their ballots from using drop boxed to submit those ballots.
But Ohio’s Republican-controlled Supreme Court, which sidestepped ruling on the merits of the case, acted as if the timing of the challenge was the problem, arguing that “if we were to grant a writ, we would effectively be ordering a change to election procedures after the election has already started.” But Democratic Justice Jennifer Brunner said, “Whatever intentions accompanied the secretary’s actions, the result is noxious and repugnant to elections that are free, fair, open, and honest.”
First District Appeals Judge Pierre Bergeron and Fifth District Appeals Judge William Hoffman, who were sitting in for justices who recused themselves, accused the secretary of state of “a sleight of hand that should make our citizens shudder” and called the new rule “an affront to personal dignity.” The LaRose decision “sends the message that marginalized citizens may be safely relegated to the sidelines in our democracy,” they wrote.
Republicans have gone on a full-on war against what they call “ballot harvesting.”
In recent years, Republicans, taking their cues from former President Donald Trump, have gone on a full-on war against what they call “ballot harvesting” — that is, when a person or group submits multiple sealed ballots to a drop-off location. They claim the practice leads to fraud. Despite that, Republican National Committee co-chair Lara Trump said in April that the party was committed to engage in the kind of ballot-collection plans it has derided as “harvesting.” That’s because some Republicans recognize that helping people would help them win elections and have stepped up their own ballot harvesting operations.
But, clearly, the GOP’s strategy is only for voters they think are valid. And, in turn, they continue to make voting more difficult across the country. There is, of course, some irony here, given that elderly voters have historically skewed Republican and these types of procedures will make it harder for them to vote. One of the vicissitudes of life is that if people are fortunate enough to grow old, they are more likely to become disabled. (Former President Jimmy Carter, who celebrated his 100th birthday this month, is now disabled. Officials from the Carter Center said he voted by mail Wednesday in Georgia.)
LaRose’s rule did not come out of nowhere. Last year, Ohio’s Republican governor, Mike DeWine, signed legislation that would restrict which family members can help disabled voters cast ballots. A federal judge struck down parts of the law. In Alabama, Republican Gov. Kay Ivey signed a measure that made it unlawful “to knowingly distribute an absentee ballot application to a voter that is prefilled with the voter’s name or any other information required on the application form.” It also created the crime of “distributing, ordering, requesting, collecting, completing, prefilling, obtaining, or delivering a voter’s absentee ballot application.”
These are policies that make it difficult, if not impossible, for some disabled Americans to vote. A federal court blocked part of that law. But as we saw this week, the assault on people with disabilities trying to express their wishes for their government continues. It’s expected that more disabled voters than ever will cast ballots this year. It’s expected that more disabled voters than ever will cast ballots this year. Rutgers University released a study this week that showed that there will be 40.2 million eligible voters with disabilities, a 5.1% increase from 2020. According to that study, there are more voters with disabilities than there are Black voters or Latino voters. The number of disabled voters is increasing because of both an aging voter population and medical advances. States and localities, therefore, should be moving to make voting as accessible as possible. But that is the opposite of what Ohio is doing.
Eric Garcia is an author and senior correspondent for The Independent. 
