U.S. attorney scolds county on voting law

The U.S. Department of Justice says a lawsuit over satellite voting centers on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation ought to move forward.

Jackson County was sued in September by four residents of Wanblee, a reservation town of 725. They say the county's initial refusal to set up a satellite voting center for in-person absentee balloting amounted to a violation of the federal Voting Rights Act.

The Oglala Lakota residents say absentee voting at the Jackson County Courthouse is made difficult by the distance between the reservation's population center of Wanblee and the location of the absentee voting center in Kadoka.

The county opened a center in Wanblee in late October, but the lawsuit continued.

After the election, the county filed a motion asking Judge Karen Schreier to toss the case, but the Department of Justice has asked her not to.

U.S. Attorney Brendan Johnson says the county's refusal to open a satellite office – the cost for which can be reimbursed through Help America Vote Act funds – was not a reasonable response, given the state's history with the Native American community.

"Let's be clear, South Dakota does not have a proud history when it comes to providing Native Americans an equal right to vote," Johnson said. "We should be doing more, not less, to protect the right of every South Dakotan to vote in our elections."

Native Americans have to drive twice as far to get to Kadoka as white residents of Jackson County, the complaint alleges, and a host of socioeconomic factors on the reservation make the half hour trip more difficult.

Instead of responding formally to the allegations of voter suppression, Jackson County asked Judge Karen Schreier to dismiss the case altogether.

There are three ways to vote absentee, the county's lawyers wrote: In person at the county auditor's office, by direct mail, or by delivery through a third party. Native Americans are not displaced or unduly affected by the lack of voting centers, the county says.

"In addition to the three methods of absentee voting available in South Dakota, each Plaintiff can also vote on Election Day at their local precinct polling place, which includes a polling place at the precise location Plaintiffs are suing for an absentee voting site – Wanblee," the lawyers wrote.

The lawsuit should be dismissed, the lawyers wrote, because it contains no proof that the decision not to open an early voting center disenfranchised Native Americans, a protected class under the Voting Rights Act.

The Department of Justice response says the issues raised in the lawsuit are clearly within the scope of the act, however, and deserve a fair hearing.

"Courts have consistently interpreted Section 2 (of the Voting Rights Act) to cover all manner of voting procedures," the DOJ brief says. "In particular, courts have repeatedly entertained Section 2 claims that involve access to polling places, to voter registration, and to opportunities for absentee and early voting."

Voting in Indian Country has been a contentious issue in South Dakota since statehood. Native Americans were denied the right to vote until the 1940s, and Native Americans in unincorporated counties weren't allowed to vote until the 1980s.

The Voting Rights Act was extended to Native Americans in 1975, 10 years after its passage.

Former Governor Bill Janklow, at the time serving as the state's Attorney General, wrote a letter that year expressing hope that the federal government repeal "the Voting Rights Act currently plaguing South Dakota."

More recently, the issue of voting centers simmered over when outgoing Secretary of State Jason Gant claimed in 2013 that he didn't have the authority to spend Help America Vote Act money for three requested Indian Country voting centers without consulting a federal commission that hadn't met for years. He agreed to release the funds in February, however.

Matt Rappold, a Winner lawyer who represents the plaintiffs in the Wanblee case, said he was pleased that the Department of Justice intervened, saying it's a sign that his clients are on the right side of federal law.

"The federal government has a responsibility to join cases where they have an interest," Rappold said.

Sara Frankenstein, a Rapid City lawyer who represents Jackson County, did not return calls for comment Wednesday.