March 19, 2019 
 
The Honorable Bryan Hughes 
Via email: bryan.hughes@senate.texas.gov 
P.O. Box 12068 
Capitol Station 
Austin, TX 78711 
 
Dear Senator Hughes, 
 
As Texas lawyers for Texas communities, the Texas Civil Rights Project, with our partners listed 
below, writes to express strong opposition to Senate Bill 9 (“SB 9”), a bill that you introduced on 
March 7 (the eve of the bill filing deadline) in the Texas Senate, which represents a dangerous new 
assault on voting rights in Texas. SB 9 would sharply escalate the state’s ongoing campaign of voter 
suppression by making voting substantially harder for thousands of Texans and by spreading fear 
that people may be thrown in jail for honest mistakes while trying to vote. We therefore urge you 
to immediately eliminate all provisions of this bill that do not deal with voting machine 
security (Article 5) or withdraw it from the Texas Senate; if you do not, we urge every 
member of the Texas Legislature to vote against this bill.  
 
Three categories of the bill stand out to us. First, several measures would bolster an ongoing 
campaign of selective criminal prosecutions aimed at deterring people from voting, particularly 
voters from historically marginalized communities. Most notoriously, two women of color (Crystal 
Mason and Rosa Ortega) recently received long prison sentences in Texas for seeking to cast a ballot 
because they mistakenly thought they were eligible to vote.1 Although framed as a campaign to 
combat “voter fraud,” the fact that white men who knowingly commit more egregious election-related 
offenses receive significantly reduced punishment reveals the fundamentally discriminatory purpose 
of these efforts—one that has nothing to do with combating “fraud.”2  
 
Your bill would double down on these efforts by granting even more authority to those prosecutors 
who have already demonstrated a penchant for pursuing a witch hunt against minority voters. For 
example, one provision would effectively eliminate any intent requirement for certain election related 
offenses, which signals a clear effort to make prosecutions against those who make honest mistakes 
1

Ed Pilkington, U.S. Voter Suppression: Why This Texas Woman is Facing Five Years’ Prison, Tʜᴇ
Gᴜᴀʀᴅɪᴀɴ, Aug. 28, 2018,
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/aug/27/crime-of-voting-texas-woman-crystal-mason-five-year
s-prison; Anna Tinsley and Deanna Boyd, Prison-bound? Grand Prairie Mom Sentenced to 8 Years for
Illegal Voting Loses Appeal, Fᴛ. Wᴏʀᴛʜ Sᴛᴀʀ-Tᴇʟᴇɢ., Nov. 28, 2018,
https://www.star-telegram.com/news/politics-government/election/article222302160.html
2
Anna Tinsley, Tarrant County Judge Pleads Guilty, Resigns After Using Fake Signatures to get on Ballot,
Fᴛ. Wᴏʀᴛʜ Sᴛᴀʀ-Tᴇʟᴇɢ., Apr. 23, 2018,
https://www.star-telegram.com/news/politics-government/state-politics/article209608374.html

 in the voting process (like Crystal Mason and Rosa Ortega) much more common.3 Whether 
intentionally or not, the bill as it is currently written would effectively open to prosecution any voter 
who casts a provisional ballot if they mistakenly believe they are registered or are mistakenly trying 
to vote in the wrong precinct. In the five largest urban counties in 2018 alone, 9,608 voters had 
provisional ballots rejected for these reasons. This bill would undermine the very purpose of having 
provisional ballots and likely violates the federal Help America Vote Act. 
 
Elsewhere, the bill raises certain election related offenses, that also may commonly result from 
innocent mistakes, from misdemeanor level offenses to a state jail felony that is punishable by up to 
a maximum of 2 years in state jail and a fine up to $10,000.4 The bill would also create a new and 
vaguely worded offense which criminalizes conduct “within 1,000 feet of a polling place . . . that 
hinders a person from entering the polling place,” and would make it punishable by up to six months 
in jail and a fine of up to $2,000.5 This new offense could be misused against not only nonpartisan 
election protection volunteers who assist voters in that space, but also partisan electioneers 
exercising their First Amendment rights peacefully outside of polling places and ordinary citizens 
going about their daily life who just happen to pass through this greatly expanded zone.   
 
Also troubling, the bill includes a provision granting immunity to law enforcement officials who 
commit election related crimes during an investigation or prosecution. This appears intended to 
incite undercover sting operations of civic engagement groups and political campaigns, which would 
amount to a state-sanctioned version of stunts conducted by groups like Project Veritas.6  
 
Second, the bill would impose substantial and unnecessary new barriers on those needing 
assistance in exercising their right to vote, in particular elderly and disabled voters. Two provisions 
appear to require people to fill out new forms if they either 1) drive voters to the polls who need 
curbside assistance,7 or 2) provide assistance to voters who have a physical disability or who are 
unable to read the ballot.8 Section 2.07 also grants partisan poll watchers new powers to snoop 
around in the paperwork submitted when a voter is being assisted, and Section 2.08 pierces the 
secrecy of the ballot booth by allowing partisan poll watchers and election officials to observe such 
voters as their ballots are marked.  
 

3

S.B. 9, Tᴇx. Eʟᴇᴄᴛɪᴏɴ Cᴏᴅᴇ § 1.05, 86th Leg., Reg. Sess. (Tex. 2019).
S.B. 9, Tᴇx. Eʟᴇᴄᴛɪᴏɴ Cᴏᴅᴇ § 1.03, 86th Leg., Reg. Sess. (Tex. 2019); S.B. 9, Tᴇx. Eʟᴇᴄᴛɪᴏɴ Cᴏᴅᴇ §
1.06, 86th Leg., Reg. Sess. (Tex. 2019).
5
S.B. 9, Tᴇx. Eʟᴇᴄᴛɪᴏɴ Cᴏᴅᴇ § 1.04, 86th Leg., Reg. Sess. (Tex. 2019).
6
S.B. 9, Tᴇx. Eʟᴇᴄᴛɪᴏɴ Cᴏᴅᴇ § 1.07, 86th Leg., Reg. Sess. (Tex. 2019).
7
We understand that the Committee Substitute you have proposed would exempt only drivers who are
family members of the voters, or those who are driving fewer than three voters.
8
S.B. 9, Tᴇx. Eʟᴇᴄᴛɪᴏɴ Cᴏᴅᴇ § 2.11, 86th Leg., Reg. Sess. (Tex. 2019); S.B. 9, Tᴇx. Eʟᴇᴄᴛɪᴏɴ Cᴏᴅᴇ §
2.12, 86th Leg., Reg. Sess. (Tex. 2019).
4

 Third, SB 9 would loosen safeguards protecting voters’ private information—apparently in order 
to make voter purges more common, such as the one recently conducted by Secretary of State David 
Whitley, and to enable the state’s participation in programs like Kris Kobach’s discredited 
Interstate Voter Registration Crosscheck Program. Section 4.01 would expand direct access to the 
electronic statewide voter registration database to “any official responsible for ensuring the integrity 
of the voter rolls or compliance with the election laws of this state,” a broad category that could 
include any number of government employees with only a tangential role in elections at any level of 
government in the state. It also explicitly authorizes the Attorney General’s access to the electronic 
statewide voter registration database, a troubling provision given the Attorney General’s recent 
attempt to politicize the voter rolls by falsely claiming to have discovered tens of thousands of 
non-citizens on the rolls.9 Voter registration databases have proven to be one of the most vulnerable 
points of the election infrastructure,10 and granting direct electronic access to tens of thousands of 
individuals would exponentially magnify this risk.  
 
Incredibly, your bill would even allow for the disclosure of voters’ Social Security Numbers and dates 
of birth to “to other states and jurisdictions” for them to conduct their own fishing expeditions.11 
This provision appears to be clearly aimed at removing obstacles to participation in the Interstate 
Voter Registration Crosscheck Program, a fatally flawed, notoriously unreliable, and largely defunct 
attempt to find duplicate registrations in other states.   
 
These provisions would be concerning at any time, but they are especially brazen given that the state 
has been embroiled nearly all year in a scandal resulting from Mr. Whitley’s misuse of voter data to 
purge naturalized citizens from the voter rolls under the guise of combating “voter fraud.” Only a 
few weeks ago, a federal judge described the State’s misuse of voter data as “ham handed” and an 
example of “the power of government to strike fear and anxiety and to intimidate the least powerful 
among us.”12 To reward the government’s incompetence—or maliciousness—with even more power over 
voter data is absurd. 
 
Finally, there are other concerning provisions that do not fit neatly into any particular category 
but which warrant further scrutiny. For instance, Section 4.03 would impose a new and seemingly 
arbitrary requirement on Harris, Dallas, and Travis Counties to place countywide voting centers such 
that “a voter who resides in the precinct where the polling place is located [would not have] to travel 
9

See, e.g., Press Release, AG Paxton: Texas Secretary of State’s Office Discovers Nearly 95,000 People
Identified by DPS as Non-U.S. Citizens are Registered to Vote in Texas, dated Jan. 25, 2019,
https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/news/releases/ag-paxton-texas-secretary-states-office-discovers-n
early-95000-people-identified-dps-non-us-citizens.
10
See, e.g., United States Senate Committee Report, Russian Targeting of Election Infrastructure During
the 2016 Election: Summary of Initial Findings and Recommendations, May 08, 2018.
11
S.B. 9, Tᴇx. Eʟᴇᴄᴛɪᴏɴ Cᴏᴅᴇ § 4.02, 86th Leg., Reg. Sess. (Tex. 2019).
12
Texas League of United Latin American Citizens v. Whitley, No. SA-19-CA-074-FB at 1 (W.D. Tex. Feb.
27, 2019) (order denying defendant's’ motion to dismiss).

 more than three miles from the voter’s residence to the polling place.”13 The public needs to hear 
what impact this provision will have on the costs of operating countywide voting centers, including 
whether it might endanger the program in those counties. The Committee Substitute you have 
proposed also appears to ban any pre-filled voter registration applications, a tool that some civic 
engagement organizations have lawfully used to help voters quickly fill out these forms. Article 3’s 
changes to laws regarding election contests also require further study, and an explanation from you 
as to their purpose and intended effect.  
 
As a whole, this bill would take Texas in the wrong direction. In recent years, Texas’ voter 
participation rates have been among the lowest in the country.14 This is not because Texans care less 
about democracy than Americans elsewhere, but because state officials have gone out of their way to 
enact ever more restrictive voting laws in a bid to hold onto power. Far from combating widespread 
“voter fraud” — claims of which have been repeatedly disproven — this bill is the next, significantly 
more aggressive step in a voter suppression campaign that most recently included Mr. Whitley’s 
disastrous voter purge.  
 
Our elected officials should be making voting easier for eligible Texans, not harder. Our elected 
officials should cut the bureaucratic red tape that has been wrapped around the ballot box in recent 
years, not enact more of it. Our elected officials should empower all voters to take part in holding 
our leaders accountable, not shielding powerful officials from the will of the people. There are many 
steps that Texas can make to strengthen democracy in this state — but the first step must be to 
reject SB 9. We therefore urge you to immediately eliminate all provisions of this bill that do 
not deal with voting machine security (Article 5) or withdraw it from the Texas Senate; if you 
do not, we urge every member of the Texas Legislature to vote against this bill.   
 
 
Sincerely,  
 
Clean Elections Texas 
 
Common Cause Texas 
 
Common Ground for Texans 
 
13

Section 4.03 applies to counties “with a population of more than one million,” and only Harris, Dallas,
and Travis Counties meet that population test, and are either currently participating or have announced
plans to participate in the countywide vote center program.
14
Stephen Young, Texas’ Horrible Voter Turnout Continued in 2016, New Study Says, Dᴀʟʟᴀꜱ Oʙꜱᴇʀᴠᴇʀ,
Mar. 21, 2017, https://www.dallasobserver.com/news/texas-voter-turnout-sucked-again-in-2016-9289492.

 IGNITE 
 
Indivisible Austin 
 
Jolt Initiative 
 
Mi Familia Vota 
 
MOVE Texas 
 
Progress Texas 
 
Students Rise 
 
Texas Civil Rights Project 
 
Texas Freedom Network  
 
Texas Organizing Project 
 
Workers Defense Action Fund