A federal court in Texas Monday found that the state’s voter ID law was passed in 2011 with the intent to discriminate against minority voters. The ruling comes after the law was repeatedly found to have the effect of discriminating against minority voters, but it has been sent back to the district court by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to assess the intent claims with a higher legal standard.

“Because the Fifth Circuit found that some of the evidence in this case was not probative of a discriminatory purpose in the Texas Legislature’s enactment of SB 14, this Court was tasked with re-examining its conclusion on the discriminatory purpose issue,” the opinion, written by U.S. District Judge Nelva Gonzales Ramos, said. “Upon reconsideration and a re-weighing of the evidence in conformity with the Fifth Circuit’s opinion, the Court holds that the evidence found ‘infirm’ did not tip the scales.”

A discriminatory intent ruling risks Texas being placed under the so-called pre-clearance scheme of the Voting Rights Act, meaning that the state would have to get any changes to its voting protocols cleared by the federal government. Texas was previously covered under pre-clearance until the 2013 Supreme Court decision Shelby County v. Holder gutted a provision of the law.

After Texas’s GOP legislature passed the law in 2011, it was blocked by both the Department of Justice and a Washington, D.C.-based federal court, the two routes Texas had in getting an election policy federally-approved under the pre-Shelby VRA scheme. Once the Supreme Court gutted the VRA the formula that placed Texas and other states with histories of racially discriminatory voting practices under pre-clearance, Texas was able to implement to law, and was then sued by civil rights groups in 2013 who claimed it violated the Voting Rights Act as well as the Constitution.

The Department of Justice, under President Obama, was also involved in the lawsuit.

The district court in 2014 initially found it to be a constitutional violation, a poll tax, and a Voting Rights violation in both intent and effect. Texas appealed the ruling to the 5th Circuit, where after a 3-judge panel upheld at least some of the district court’s finding, the full appeals court also said last July that it had a discriminatory effect.

Monday’s ruling comes after the 5th Circuit asked the district court to use a more narrow framework to assess the evidence in regards to the intent claims.

Judge Gonzales Ramos said that even in that rubric, the burden was on the state to prove that the law had not been passed with a discriminatory intent and that Texas “has not met its burden.”

The judge pointed to “evidence of a pattern, unexplainable on grounds other than race,” such as changes to the law rejected by the Texas legislature that would have blunted the disproportionate effect the law had on minority voters.

“For instance, amendments were proposed to allow additional types of photo identification, a more liberal policy on expired documents, easier voter registration procedures, reduced costs for obtaining necessary ID, and more voter education regarding the requirements,” she said.

She also highlighted the “radical departures from normal practices” that Texas took in passing the law, as well as the lack of evidence of the types of voter fraud the law’s supporters said it would address.

“As previously demonstrated, the evidence shows a tenuous relationship between those rationales and the actual terms of the bill,” the opinions said, later adding that, for instance, the “bill did nothing to address mail-in balloting, which is much more vulnerable to fraud.”

Over the course of a legal battle that has lasted half a decade, Texas has shown a determination to fight tooth-and-nail in defense of its law. It’s likely that it will no longer be fighting against the Department of Justice under President Trump, as Attorney General Jeff Sessions is a proponent of voter ID laws and has expressed skepticism toward the Voting Rights Act. Trump’s DOJ had already shown signs that it would change its posture towards voting restrictions like the one passed in Texas with its attempt in January to delay the district court proceedings in this case.

Read the full opinion below:</s>(Reuters) - A Texas law that requires voters to show identification before casting ballots was enacted with the intent to discriminate against black and Hispanic voters, a U.S. federal judge ruled on Monday.

The decision by U.S. District Judge Nelva Gonzales Ramos came after an appeals court last year said the 2011 law had an outsized impact on minority voters. The court sent the case back to Ramos to determine if lawmakers intentionally wrote the legislation to be discriminatory.

Ramos said in a 10-page decision that evidence “establishes that a discriminatory purpose was at least one of the substantial or motivating factors behind passage” of the measure.

“The terms of the bill were unduly strict,” she added.

Spokesmen for Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton Jr. and Governor Greg Abbott, both Republicans, could not be reached for comment.

In January, after the Supreme Court declined to hear the case, Paxton said it was a common sense law to prevent voter fraud.

The ruling on voter ID comes about a month after two federal judges ruled that Texas lawmakers drew up three U.S. congressional districts to undermine the influence of Hispanic voters.

The measure requires voters to present photo identification such as a driver’s license, passport or military ID card.

Plaintiffs have argued the law hits elderly and poorer voters, including minorities, hardest because they are less likely to have identification. They contend the measure is used by Republicans to suppress voters who typically align with Democrats.

The legislation has been in effect since 2011 despite the legal challenges.

Ramos said the law had met criteria set by the U.S. Supreme Court to show intent that included its discriminatory impact, a pattern not explainable on other than racial grounds, Texas’ history of discriminatory practices and the law’s unusually swift passage.

Kristen Clarke, president of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, one of the plaintiffs, said the ruling showed other states that discriminatory laws would not stand up to legal scrutiny.

“This is a good ruling that confirms what we have long known, that Texas’ voter ID law stands as one of the most discriminatory voting restrictions of its kind,” she said.

In a shift from its stance under former President Barack Obama, the U.S. Justice Department dropped a discrimination claim against the law in February. The department said that the state legislature was considering changing the law in ways that might correct shortcomings.</s>(CNN) A federal court judge ruled that a Texas voter ID law was passed with the intent to discriminate against minorities, violating the Voting Rights Act.

The state's voter ID law has been under legal challenge since it passed in 2011 and went into effect in 2013. The Texas law requires voters to present government-issued photo IDs such as a state driver's license, a Texas election identification certificate, a US passport or a military identification card.

Proponents of the law say requiring photo IDs before casting a vote prevents voter fraud.

Critics of the voter ID law say such requirements disenfranchise poor and minority voters, who face difficulties obtaining IDs. They also point out that while Texas accepts a license to carry a handgun as a permissible form of voter ID, it doesn't accept federal or state government IDs or a student ID.

"The terms of the bill were unduly strict," wrote Judge Nelva Gonzales Ramos for the US District Court for the Southern District of Texas. "Many categories of acceptable photo IDs permitted by other states were omitted from the Texas bill."

She also concluded in Monday's ruling that the law "had a discriminatory impact" and that there had been a "pattern of conduct unexplainable on grounds other than (the) race factor."

The Department of Justice during the Obama administration and other organizations had joined efforts to stop what they considered to be one of the strictest voting ID laws in the nation. But recently, the Justice Department reversed its course under President Donald Trump's administration and withdrew its claim in the case.

The Texas Attorney General's Office issued a brief statement saying it probably will appeal.

"We're disappointed and will seek review of this ruling at the appropriate time," said Marc Rylander, director of communications for Attorney General Ken Paxton

Advocates for voting rights and minorities applauded the judge's decision.

"There is no doubt that the court reached the right result," said Amy L. Rudd of Dechert LLP, pro bono counsel for the NAACP Texas State Conference and the Mexican American Legislative Caucus, in a statement. "We hope today's decision sends a strong message to the Texas legislature that any deliberate attempt to restrict Texas minority citizens' right to vote will not be tolerated."

The immediate effect of the ruling was unclear. The judge didn't specify what would happen next.

Meanwhile, the Texas legislature is currently discussing several bills relating to voter ID, the spokesman for the Secretary of State's Office, Sam Taylor, said in an email.

If that happened, Texas might be required to seek federal approval before changing election laws.

"If (and it is a big if) the ruling stands through the 5th Circuit and Supreme Court appeals, it would be grounds for throwing out the entire law (and not just softening it though an affidavit requirement, etc.) and potentially a basis to put the state back under federal supervision for up to 10 years," Hasen wrote.

Wisconsin's voter ID law has been in and out of court for several years.

Last November, a federal judge criticized the state government for not doing enough to inform the public that "credentials valid for voting" would be issued to those who visit the DMV and initiate the ID petition process. But the judge did not strike down the voter ID law.

The case made its way to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, based in New Orleans, which issued a 9-6 opinion in July, finding similarly that it violated the Voting Rights Act. The appeals court sent the case back back to the district court to figure out whether the law was intended to discriminate.

Ramos said in her decision that the voter ID bill "was passed with a discriminatory purpose, despite its proponents' assertions that it was necessary to combat voter fraud."

Here is some of her reasoning:

At the heart of the issue is an ongoing battle between Republicans who say they hope to fight voter fraud and Democrats who say the true aim of such photo ID requirements is to create a substantial burden on the right to vote, particularly for minority voters.</s>(CNN) A federal court judge ruled that a Texas voter ID law was passed with the intent to discriminate against minorities, violating the Voting Rights Act.

The state's voter ID law has been under legal challenge since it passed in 2011 and went into effect in 2013. The Texas law requires voters to present government-issued photo IDs such as a state driver's license, a Texas election identification certificate, a US passport or a military identification card.

Proponents of the law say requiring photo IDs before casting a vote prevents voter fraud.

Critics of the voter ID law say such requirements disenfranchise poor and minority voters, who face difficulties obtaining IDs. They also point out that while Texas accepts a license to carry a handgun as a permissible form of voter ID, it doesn't accept federal or state government IDs or a student ID.

"The terms of the bill were unduly strict," wrote Judge Nelva Gonzales Ramos for the US District Court for the Southern District of Texas. "Many categories of acceptable photo IDs permitted by other states were omitted from the Texas bill."

She also concluded in Monday's ruling that the law "had a discriminatory impact" and that there had been a "pattern of conduct unexplainable on grounds other than (the) race factor."

The Department of Justice during the Obama administration and other organizations had joined efforts to stop what they considered to be one of the strictest voting ID laws in the nation. But recently, the Justice Department reversed its course under President Donald Trump's administration and withdrew its claim in the case.

"We're disappointed and will seek review of this ruling at the appropriate time," said Marc Rylander, director of communications for Attorney General Ken Paxton

Advocates for voting rights and minorities applauded the judge's decision.

"There is no doubt that the court reached the right result," said Amy L. Rudd of Dechert LLP, pro bono counsel for the NAACP Texas State Conference and the Mexican American Legislative Caucus, in a statement. "We hope today's decision sends a strong message to the Texas legislature that any deliberate attempt to restrict Texas minority citizens' right to vote will not be tolerated."

Wisconsin's voter ID law has been in and out of court for several years.

Last November, a federal judge criticized the state government for not doing enough to inform the general public that "credentials valid for voting" would be issued to those who visit the DMV and initiate the ID petition process. But the judge did not strike down the voter ID law.

The case made its way to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, based in New Orleans, which reached a 9-6 opinion in July, finding similarly that it violated the Voting Rights Act. The appeals court sent the case back back to the district court to figure out whether the law was intended to discriminate.

Ramos said in her decision that the voter ID bill "was passed with a discriminatory purpose, despite its proponents' assertions that it was necessary to combat voter fraud."

Here is some of her reasoning:

At the heart of the issue is a raging battle between Republicans who say they hope to fight voter fraud and Democrats who say the true aim of such photo ID requirements is to create a substantial burden on the right to vote, particularly for minority voters.</s>AUSTIN, Texas — A federal court judge ruled that a Texas voter ID law was passed with the intent to discriminate against minorities, violating the Voting Rights Act.

The state’s voter ID law has been under legal challenge since it passed in 2011 and went into effect in 2013.

The Texas law requires voters to present government-issued photo IDs such as a state driver’s license, a Texas election identification certificate, a U.S. passport or a military identification card.

Proponents of the law say requiring photo IDs before casting a vote prevents voter fraud.

Critics of the voter ID law say such requirements disenfranchise poor and minority voters, who face difficulties obtaining IDs.

They also point out that while Texas accepts a license to carry a handgun as a permissible form of voter ID, it doesn’t accept federal or state government IDs or a student ID.

“The terms of the bill were unduly strict,” wrote Judge Nelva Gonzales Ramos for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas. “Many categories of acceptable photo IDs permitted by other states were omitted from the Texas bill.”

She also concluded in Monday’s ruling that the law “had a discriminatory impact” and that there had been a “pattern of conduct unexplainable on grounds other than (the) race factor.”

The Department of Justice during the Obama administration and other organizations had joined efforts to stop what they considered to be one of the strictest voting ID laws in the nation.

But recently, the Justice Department reversed its course under President Donald Trump’s administration and withdrew its claim in the case.

“We’re disappointed and will seek review of this ruling at the appropriate time,” said Marc Rylander, director of communications for Attorney General Ken Paxton.

Advocates for voting rights and minorities applauded the judge’s decision.

“There is no doubt that the court reached the right result,” said Amy L. Rudd of Dechert, pro bono counsel for the NAACP Texas State Conference and the Mexican American Legislative Caucus.

“We hope today’s decision sends a strong message to the Texas legislature that any deliberate attempt to restrict Texas minority citizens’ right to vote will not be tolerated.”

In August, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a lower court ruling that blocked key provisions of North Carolina’s voter ID law.

By deadlocking 4-4, the court left in place the ruling by a three-judge panel of the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals that held provisions of the law targeted “African-Americans with almost surgical precision.”

The law that was struck down had required a photo ID to vote, imposed restrictions on early voting days and eliminated same-day registration. Republican leaders in the North Carolina Legislature complained the ruling was politically motivated.

Wisconsin’s voter ID law has been in and out of court for several years.

In November, a federal judge criticized the state government for not doing enough to inform the general public that “credentials valid for voting” would be issued to those who visit the DMV and initiate the ID petition process. But the judge did not strike down the voter ID law.</s>A Texas law that requires voters to show ID before they can cast their ballots was designed to discriminate against minorities, a federal judge ruled Monday, marking the second time she has condemned the law’s intentions.

U.S. District Judge Nelva Gonzales Ramos said the 2011 law has disproportionately impacted black and Latino voters — an outcome the Republican lawmakers who wrote it wanted, she wrote.

“A discriminatory purpose was at least one of the substantial or motivating factors behind passage,” Ramos wrote in her 10-page ruling, adding that the voter ID law — which is largely considered to be the toughest in the nation after a court struck down a similar North Carolina rule in July — violated the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

Enjoy this article? Sign up at Tribune.com for our upcoming newsletter.

The Monday decision is the second time Ramos, appointed by former U.S. president Barack Obama, ruled against the law. She struck it down in 2014, writing that it “was imposed with an unconstitutional discriminatory purpose” and made it more difficult for Latino and black voters to cast their ballots.

The state appealed to the Fifth Circuit Court, which in July agreed with Ramos’s ruling that the voter law was unconstitutional. But the appeals judges asked her to reconsider the part of her decision that insisted the bill was written with the specific purpose to discriminate against minority voters — paving the way for her Monday reaffirmation.

After the appeals court upheld Ramos’s ruling, Texas appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, but in January, the high court declined to hear the case, allowing the decision against the law to stand.

Ramos’ Monday ruling comes a month after a separate court ruled that Republican lawmakers in Texas gerrymandered several congressional districts in 2011, specifically and illegally drawing district borders based on the races of residents.

The voter ID law was first proposed by Republican lawmakers in 2005, who argued it would prevent voter fraud by double-checking the identity of anyone who tried to cast a ballot. Under the legislation, each voter would need to provide one of seven types of ID — including driver’s licenses, passports, weapons permits, and special, state-provided voter ID cards — every time he or she went to the polls.

But Democratic lawmakers insisted the legislation would hurt poor and minority voters, who are less likely to have ID — and who are more likely to vote for Democratic candidates. While Republicans held a majority in both the state House and Senate, Democrats were able to block the bill three times. But by 2011, the GOP had a two-thirds majority, and conservative lawmakers finally passed it. Then-governor Rick Perry signed the bill into law that May.

It has remained in effect for the past six years, even as legal challenges mounted — although it was modified slightly ahead of the November presidential election. In August, the state and several groups advocating for minority voters struck a deal that softened the law by allowing anyone without an ID to vote so long as they signed an affidavit declaring that they were unable to obtain the required identification documents. Any voter who possessed proper ID was still required to show it.

But the state’s ID law did not stop improper voting. In November, at least 500 people were able to vote in Texas without showing an ID by signing an affidavit — even though they indicated they had identification.

Ramos’s ruling against the 2011 voter ID law could pave the way for the state to be stripped of its rights to change election laws without federal approval.

Under the Voting Rights Act — which prohibits discrimination at the polling place and, among other things, outlawed literacy tests and other ploys that historically targeted minority voters — states with a history of racial discrimination must get permission from the Justice Department before they can change their voting laws. The 1965 law outlined a formula, which included states’ histories of discrimination devices, to determine which states needed so-called preclearance.

In 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the part of the law that detailed that formula — but it kept the part of the law that describes pre-clearance intact. Essentially, it’s still legal for the Justice Department to require states to get federal approval before changing election laws, but there’s no set way to determine which states should be subjected to it.

The Monday ruling states that Texas implemented discrimination election laws, but since the Voting Rights Act formula was overturned, there’s little precedent for what constitutes a history of racial discrimination. Deputies of Republican Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton acknowledged that Texas could be subjected to preclearance following the ruling — but said even they are not certain.

“It’s possible. It’s our belief that you’d have to have multiple instances of discriminatory purpose,” Brantley Starr, a deputy first assistant attorney general, said.

Despite the uncertain future of preclearance in Texas, civil rights advocates lauded Ramos’s decision.

“This is a good ruling that confirms what we have long known, that Texas’ voter ID law stands as one of the most discriminatory voting restrictions of its kind,” Kristen Clarke, president of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, said.</s>A federal judge has ruled for the second time that a Texas law has intentionally discriminated against minority voters.



Judge Nelva Gonzales Ramos, of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, ruled Monday that in 2011, lawmakers passed a voter ID law with intent to discriminate against Black and Latino voters. She made a similar ruling in 2014, married with the ruling that the law had a discriminatory effect.



The state of Texas appealed Gonzales Ramos’ previous decision to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, which agreed with Gonzales Ramos on the discriminatory effect ruling. Texas appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court about the discriminatory effect ruling, but was rejected, and the lower court’s ruling stands. But the Fifth Circuit did not agree with the discriminatory intent ruling and sent it back to Gonzales Ramos.



It’s no surprise Gonzales Ramos again found that lawmakers had an intent to discriminate, says Mark Jones, with Rice University’s Baker Institute.



And without question, Jones says, Texas is going to appeal the ruling again to the Fifth Circuit.



"Given that we're dealing with pretty much the exact same evidence – and [Gonzales Ramos] never could locate a real smoking gun that showed true discriminatory intent,” he says, “it's going to be pretty likely that the Fifth Circuit is going to overturn her ruling – which means the plaintiffs will end up appealing it to the Supreme Court. So we're looking at this case probably being in the court system for at least another year or two."



If Gonzales Ramos’ ruling stands, the case could put Texas’ election procedure under federal oversight. Plaintiffs could go to the courts and ask that Texas be bailed under Section Three of the Voting Rights Act – which states that if a state or jurisdiction is shown to have intentionally discriminated against certain voters, the state or county must get permission from the federal government to put further election laws into effect. 



"What plaintiffs are trying to do is effectively find another way to get federal oversight over elections in Texas,” Jones says. “That's a pretty tough hurdle because you have to show real evidence that the state and the ... Republicans in the state were discriminating against minorities – not just trying to engage in partisan gamesmanship to get them more legislative seats."



Monday’s ruling does not change Gonzales Ramos’ 2016 agreement with Texas for the state to set new rules about which forms of identification were acceptable to use to enter the voting booth. Citizens may use expired IDs as well as any on a list of seven photo ID documents including driver licenses, licenses to carry a handgun, passports and military identification cards. If a citizen does not have an acceptable form of ID they may sign an affidavit explaining why they aren’t able to obtain one of these forms of identification and provide some non-photo documentation like a utility bill.



The rules will likely be codified in Texas this legislative session, Jones says.



Jones says the University of Houston Hobby School of Public Affairs released a survey Monday that shows while very few people are adversely affected by not having a photo ID, that 80 percent of voters don’t understand the newly brokered voter ID laws. 



"Which shows that the secretary of state, as well as media and other groups need to do a better job as we approach 2018 to educate voters about the voter ID law,” Jones says, “so that everyone who wants to vote can vote."</s>A federal judge has ruled — for the second time — that Texas lawmakers intentionally discriminated against Latino and black voters in passing a strict voter identification law in 2011.

U.S. District Judge Nelva Gonzales Ramos ruled Monday that Texas “has not met its burden” in proving that lawmakers passed the nation’s strictest photo ID law without knowingly targeting minority voters.

The 10-page ruling, if it withstands almost certain appeals, could ultimately put Texas back on the list of states needing federal approval before changing election laws. A 2013 Supreme Court ruling sprung Texas and other states with a history of discrimination from that list.

U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals last July ruled that the Texas law disproportionally targeted minority voters who were less likely to have one of the seven forms of state-approved photo ID — a violation of the U.S. Voting Rights Act. And Texas conducted the 2016 General Elections under a court-ordered relaxation of the rules.

But the appeals court asked Ramos, of Corpus Christi, to reconsider her previous ruling that lawmakers discriminated on purpose.

After reweighing the evidence, she came to the same conclusion, according to Monday’s ruling.

Meet Paige: Our new Facebook Messenger bot helps you keep track of the 85th Legislature. Subscribe by messaging HELLO to m.me/texastribune.org. Learn more.</s>A federal judge Monday ruled that the state of Texas intentionally discriminated against African American and Hispanic voters when it enacted a draconian voter ID law in 2011. The ruling could pave the way for courts to require Texas to get approval from federal authorities before making future changes to its voting laws.

This is the second time Judge Nelva Gonzales Ramos has found that state lawmakers purposefully engaged in illegal discrimination when it adopted the photo ID requirement in 2011. In 2014, Ramos found that the law had a discriminatory effect and intent. A finding of discriminatory effect is sufficient to force a voting law to be change, but a discriminatory intent finding can open a state up to more significant punishments. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld Ramos' finding of discriminatory effect but asked her to reconsider the question of intent. Her ruling on Monday reaffirmed her previous decision.

Critics of the photo ID law pointed to the fact that Texas lawmakers allowed voters to use concealed gun permits, which are more likely to be held by white voters. But the law disallowed identification cards issued to state employees and public university students, which are more likely to be used by minorities. In her opinion, Ramos pointed out that Republican lawmakers refused to include more forms of acceptable ID, reduce the cost of acquiring an ID, adopt a more lenient policy toward expired documents, or approve voter education about the new requirements. "[T]hese efforts revealed a pattern of conduct unexplainable on nonracial grounds, to suppress minority voting," Ramos wrote in her opinion.

In 2013, the Department of Justice joined civil rights groups, Democratic lawmakers, and voters in challenging the law. On the day President Donald Trump was inaugurated, the department signaled that it might change its position. In February, the department's lawyers asked the court to allow the US government to withdraw from the case and urged. The DOJ also urged Ramos not to rule on the intent question until the Texas legislature had taken steps this spring to amend the law, which the Fifth Circuit had ordered it to do. Ramos allowed the federal government to withdraw from this part of the case but rejected its request to hold off on the intent ruling. However, Ramos did indicate that she would wait until the legislature recessed to issue any remedy in conjunction with her findings.

The intent finding is a major victory for voting rights advocates because the courts have wide latitude to remedy intentional racial discrimination. Most importantly, a finding of intent allows the courts, if they choose, to put jurisdictions under federal oversight so that future changes to election procedures must be approved by the DOJ. Civil rights groups are requesting such a remedy and feel their argument for putting Texas back under federal supervision—which ended when the Supreme Court gutted a central provision of the Voting Rights Act in 2013—is strong. Last month, a three-judge panel in a federal district court in San Antonio found, in a separate case, that Republicans had racially gerrymandered congressional districts in order to weaken the growing power of minority voters. Taken together, voting rights attorneys believe the two findings of racially discriminatory intent make a convincing case that Texas should be placed under federal supervision.

"This is a great win for Texas voters, but it shouldn't surprise anyone who looked seriously at the evidence," Myrna Pérez, deputy director of the Democracy Program at the Brennan Center said in a statement after Ramos' ruling. "Texas legislators crafted a law they knew would hurt minority voters, without any good justification or attempt to ameliorate the harms, and they mangled the legislative process to get it through."</s>Texas lawmakers intended to discriminate when they passed a strict voter ID law in 2011, a federal judge has ruled.



The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals had found in July that the law, largely considered the strictest in the nation, discriminated against some minority groups because they are less likely to have one of the approved forms of photo ID. The appeals court asked the district court judge to determine whether lawmakers discriminated on purpose.

U.S. District Judge Nelva Gonzales Ramos of Corpus Christi ruled Monday that the state failed to show that the law would have been enacted without its discriminatory purpose, violating Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.

"What the courts have found and what the evidence compelled was the belief that it wasn’t a solution in search of a problem," Chad Dunn, an attorney representing the plaintiffs, said. "It was a solution in pursuit of a political and discriminatory end.”

Dunn said the court will now have to rule on what remedies will be put in place. That could include changes to the current version of the law, as well as possible federal oversight of the state's voting laws.

The appeals court's earlier finding led to changes to the law ahead of November’s election. Texas lawmakers are considering a new bill that incorporates those changes.
A federal district court for southern Texas rules that the state's voter ID law was passed in 2011 with the intent to discriminate against minority voters. The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals previously found that the law had the effect of discriminating against minority voters, and remanded the case to the district court for further action.