Editing Voter suppression

{{short description|Strategy designed to restrict specific groups of people from voting}}
[[File:Voters at the voting booths in 1945.jpg|thumb|[[Voting|Voters]] at [[voting booth]]s in the United States in 1945]]
{{Discrimination sidebar|state=collapsed}}

'''Voter suppression''' are tactics used to discourage or prevent specific groups of people from [[voting]] or registering to vote. It is distinguished from [[political campaigning]] in that campaigning attempts to change likely voting behavior by changing the opinions of potential voters through persuasion and organization, activating otherwise inactive voters, or registering new supporters. Voter suppression, instead, attempts to gain an advantage by reducing the [[Voter turnout|turnout]] of certain voters. Suppression is an anti-democratic tactic associated with [[authoritarianism]].

The tactics of voter suppression range from changes that increase [[voter fatigue]], to [[Electoral fraud#Intimidation|intimidating]] or [[Political violence|harming prospective voters]].

== Impact ==
Some argue the term 'voter suppression' downplays the harm done when voices are not reflected in an election, calling for terms like 'vote destruction' that accounts for the permanence of each vote not being cast.<ref name=":5">{{Cite book |last=Litt |title=Democracy in one book or less : how it works, why it doesn't, and why fixing it is easier than you think |date=2020 |publisher=Ecco |isbn=978-0-06-287936-3 |edition=First |location=New York |oclc=1120147424}}</ref> Making it harder to vote for people who have been given the right, can lead to [[voter fatigue]]. Skewing the electorate jeopardizes the [[wisdom of the crowd]], and the decision-making benefits it brings. Suppression does not require intent. Analyzing the turnout of eligible voters provides a partial way to study cumulative voter suppression impacts under specific conditions, though other avenues such as [[election subversion]], [[gerrymandering]], and [[corruption]], cannot always be captured by [[voter turnout]] metrics. Additionally, some of the rules that end up suppressing votes can also be used as a [[pretext]] for [[Election subversion|throwing out votes]], even when [[Electoral fraud|voter fraud]] is extremely rare.<ref name=":1">{{Cite book |last=Rusch |first=Elizabeth |title=You call this democracy? : how to fix our government and deliver power to the people |date=2020 |publisher=Houghton Mifflin |isbn=978-0-358-17692-3 |location=Boston, Massachusetts |oclc=1124772479}}</ref>

== By type ==
=== Ballot design ===
A half-million Americans had their votes disqualified in 2008 and 2010 due to [[ballot]] design issues, including confusing instructions.<ref name=":5"/> The order of politicians on the ballot can also give one candidate an edge,<ref name=":5" /> while the length of a ballot can [[Voter fatigue|overwhelm voters]], pushing them from the electorate for some or all races and increasing the wait times in lines for in-person voters.<ref name=":12">{{Cite web |last=Demsas |first=Jerusalem |date=2023-08-21 |title=Americans Vote Too Much |url=https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2023/08/american-election-frequency-voter-turnout/675054/ |access-date=2023-09-21 |website=The Atlantic}}</ref>

=== Day-of experience ===
Requiring people to travel long distances and/or wait in long lines, for example suppresses voter turnout. Some parties in Europe that have less support among expats have made it much more difficult for them to cast ballots by removing [[Postal voting|vote by mail]] options, forcing some to travel hundreds of kilometers.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Fubini |first=Federico |date=2020-01-15 |title=Voter suppression comes to Europe |url=https://www.ips-journal.eu/topics/european-integration/voter-suppression-comes-to-europe-3999/ |access-date=2023-10-11 |website=www.ips-journal.eu}}</ref>

Weekend (such as Saturday voting in Australia), also contributes to higher turnout than weekday voting, maybe even more than having Election Day as a recognized holiday.<ref name=":5" /> A study in the UK found that when the sun sets later in the day, turnout tends to improve.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Rallings |first1=C. |last2=Thrasher |first2=M. |last3=Borisyuk |first3=G. |date=March 2003 |title=Seasonal factors, voter fatigue and the costs of voting |url=https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0261379401000476 |journal=Electoral Studies |language=en |volume=22 |issue=1 |pages=65–79 |doi=10.1016/S0261-3794(01)00047-6|url-access=subscription }}</ref>

The [[Cost of voting index|Cost of Voting Index]] estimates how much more difficult the voting experience is on average in states around the U.S.<ref>{{Cite news |last1=Corasaniti |first1=Nick |last2=McCann |first2=Allison |date=2022-09-20 |title=The 'Cost' of Voting in America: A Look at Where It's Easiest and Hardest |language=en-US |work=The New York Times |url=https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/09/20/us/politics/cost-of-voting.html |access-date=2023-01-05 |issn=0362-4331}}</ref> 78% of respondents in one preferred vote-by-mail to voting in-person.<ref name=":1" />

=== Disenfranchisement ===
The [[Disfranchisement|disenfranchisement of voters]] due to [[Voting age|age]], [[Non-resident citizen voting|residence]], [[Non-citizen suffrage|citizenship]], or [[Felony disenfranchisement|criminal record]] are among the more recent examples of ways that elections can be subverted by changing who is allowed to vote. Most countries set their voting age to 18, thus disenfranchising citizens below that age. In many countries, like Germany, disenfrachisement is an additional penalty to certain crimes, such as treason or electoral fraud. In others such as India, all prisoners lose the right to vote during the duration of their imprisonment. Some jurisdictions may disenfranchise felons for life, including [[Felony disenfranchisement in the United States|some (but not all) states]] of the United States of America.

=== Frequent elections ===
{{Main|Voter fatigue}}
Frequent elections increase the amount of time and attention required of voters, typically leading to lower [[Voter turnout|turnout]] among certain types of voters.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Anzia |first=Sarah F. |date=2011-04-01 |title=Election Timing and the Electoral Influence of Interest Groups |url=https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1017/S0022381611000028 |journal=The Journal of Politics |volume=73 |issue=2 |pages=412–427 |doi=10.1017/S0022381611000028 |issn=0022-3816|url-access=subscription }}</ref> [[Two-round system|Two-round elections]] (including [[Partisan primary|primary election]]s), [[recall election]]s, and [[off-year election]]s are some examples of elections that contribute to voter fatigue. For example, [[Japan]], [[Switzerland]] and the [[United States]] have the lowest voter turnout rates among developed countries due to holding frequent elections.<ref name="Samuel Popkin 2001. P. 9702">Michael McDonald and Samuel Popkin. [https://www.jstor.org/stable/3117725 "The Myth of the Vanishing Voter"] in American Political Science Review. December 2001. p. 970.</ref>

=== Identification ===
[[Photo identification]] requirements to vote can disenfranchise many voters especially the young, elderly, lower-income people, recently [[Transgender|transitioned]] individuals, people of color, recently married women and people with disabilities. Additionally, the implementation of signature-matching processes, especially for mail-in ballots, can also be done so strictly as to suppress orders of magnitude more votes than the actual fraud that it prevents.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2018-11-02 |title=Signature Match Laws Disproportionately Impact Voters Already on the Margins |url=https://www.aclu.org/news/voting-rights/signature-match-laws-disproportionately-impact-voters-already-margins |access-date=2023-01-30 |website=American Civil Liberties Union}}</ref>
The Center for Democracy and Civic Engagement at The University of Maryland estimates that 15% of adult American either lack driver's licenses or state IDs or have IDs that may not meet strict photo ID voting law requirements.<ref name="Andres et al 25">{{cite web |last1=Rothschild |first1=Jillian Andres |last2=Novey |first2=Samuel B |last3=Hanmer |first3=Michael J |title=Who Lacks ID in America Today? An Exploration of Voter ID Access, Barriers, and Knowledge |url=https://cdce.umd.edu/sites/cdce.umd.edu/files/pubs/Voter%20ID%202023%20survey%20Key%20Results%20Jan%202024%20%281%29.pdf |website=Center for Democracy and Civil Engagement |publisher=University of Maryland |access-date=30 March 2025 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250324082414/https://cdce.umd.edu/sites/cdce.umd.edu/files/pubs/Voter%20ID%202023%20survey%20Key%20Results%20Jan%202024%20(1).pdf |archive-date=24 March 2025 |date=January 2024}}</ref> A solution implemented in a number of countries is to automatically send free ID cards to all its citizens.<ref name=":1" />

=== Influence of money ===
Less-regulated [[Campaign finance|campaign spending]] reduces the influence of every vote by giving more power to wealthy people, special interests and [[Lobbying|lobbyists]].<ref>{{cite journal |last=Ginsburg |first=Tom |date=2018 |title=Democratic Backsliding and the Rule of Law |url=https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=13786&context=journal_articles |journal=Ohio Northern University Law Review |volume=44 |pages=351–369}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last=Baldwin |first=Bridgette |date=April 24, 2015 |title=Backsliding: The United States Supreme Court, Shelby County v. Holder and the Dismantling of Voting Rights Act of 1965 |url=https://digitalcommons.tourolaw.edu/jrge/vol7/iss1/25/ |journal=Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity |volume=7 |issue=1}}</ref> [[Political corruption|Corruption]] presents a more widely recognized form of [[election subversion]] or [[electoral fraud]] where votes or positions are acquired illegally using money.

=== Information warfare ===
{{main|Information warfare}}
[[Misinformation]], [[disinformation]], and the platforms that are incentivized to boost half-truths and lies are forms of information warfare that can be used to confuse, intimidate, or deceive voters.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Ressa |first=Maria |title=How to stand up to a dictator: the fight for our future |others=Foreword by Amal Clooney |year=2022 |isbn=978-0-06-325751-1 |edition=First |location=New York |publisher=Harper |oclc=1333867107}}</ref> When misinformation and disinformation is amplified by the laundering of foreign money through domestic [[nonprofit organization]]s or other allied domestic actors, charges of [[treason]] can be brought against these actors for colluding with a foreign power.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Levin |first=Dov H. |title=Meddling in the ballot box : the causes and effects of partisan electoral interventions |year=2020 |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0197519882}}</ref>

Common examples include undermining journalism, academia, political speech and other fundamental exchanges of ideas and information. Free or low-cost sources of information, such as through libraries, schools, nonprofits, public media, or open-source projects (like [[Wikipedia]]), have historically supported this key democratic prerequisite. For example, two-thirds of U.S. college students in one study cited a lack of information as a reason for why they did not vote.<ref name=":1" />

=== Intimidation and violence ===
Intimidation can result from the presence of cameras or guns at polling places to ballots that may not be secret.<ref>{{Cite magazine |last=Newman |first=Lily Hay |date=November 7, 2022 |title=The Secret Ballot Is US Democracy's Last Line of Defense |language=en-US |magazine=Wired |url=https://www.wired.com/story/secret-ballot-voter-intimidation-2022-us-midterms/ |access-date=2022-12-09 |issn=1059-1028}}</ref> Following-through on threats by [[Political violence|physically harming or killing people]] can severely deter voter participation.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Roush |first=Wade |title=Truly Secure Voting Is on the Way |url=https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/truly-secure-voting-is-on-the-way/ |access-date=2023-08-16 |website=Scientific American |date=January 2020 |language=en}}</ref>

=== Path dependence/tyranny of the past ===
The lack of [[intergenerational equity]] in policy undermines the ability of voters to pursue [[self-determination]] through their democratic processes. For example, the lifetime appointments of judges, or constitutions that are so difficult to change that they do not reflect the values of current voters, show how power allocated in the past can thwart voter power in the present. This kind of lock-in is only helpful if the present is less democratic than the past, which can become a self-fulfilling prophecy by simultaneously hampering the democratic innovations and evolutions that could prevent those threats by bolstering ancient architecture with the latest best-practices. Past actions can also create other kinds of [[path dependence]], where power to shape democratic institutions can be slowed down or subverted by decisions made by those who wielded power in the past, regardless of how fairly (democratically) those setting the rules came to power and regardless of the values held by or information available to voters in the present. A relatively tangible example could be a country allowing itself to run up a large [[Government debt|national debt]] that present-day voters did not consent to, shrinking discretionary spending to a fraction of what previous voters were able to spend.

===Registration or enrollment===
[[Voter registration]] (or enrollment) is an extra step in the election process creates extra work for voters, especially those who move often and are new to the system, thereby suppressing their votes. Registration has been the number one reason why citizens in the US do not vote, which is why most democracies automatically enroll their citizens.<ref name=":1" /> Same-day [[Voter registration|registration]] is another tool to make registration less of a barrier. In addition, the existence of the process itself opens up more opportunities to make the process intentionally difficult or impossible, including aggressive voter roll purges.<ref>{{Cite web |date=20 July 2018 |title=Voter Purges {{!}} Brennan Center for Justice |url=https://www.brennancenter.org/issues/ensure-every-american-can-vote/vote-suppression/voter-purges |access-date=2023-01-08 |website=www.brennancenter.org |language=en}}</ref> The [[Cost of voting index|Cost of Voting Index]] quantifies some of the differences in voter registration experiences in US states.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Schraufnagel |first1=Scot |last2=Pomante |first2=Michael J. |last3=Li |first3=Quan |date=2022-09-01 |title=Cost of Voting in the American States: 2022* |journal=Election Law Journal: Rules, Politics, and Policy |language=en |volume=21 |issue=3 |pages=220–228 |doi=10.1089/elj.2022.0041 |issn=1533-1296|doi-access=free }}</ref>

==== Party membership requirements ====
Another example where registration can suppress votes is requiring a declared party preference, which is required in closed [[Partisan primary|primaries]] in the United States for example, dissuading voters who do not want to declare a party preference in order to weigh-in on who represents them.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Cook |first=Rhodes |title=Registering By Party: Where the Democrats and Republicans Are Ahead – Sabato's Crystal Ball |date=12 July 2018 |url=https://centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/articles/registering-by-party-where-the-democrats-and-republicans-are-ahead/ |access-date=2023-01-30 |language=en-US}}</ref> [[Open primaries]] allow anyone to vote regardless of party preference or affiliation. In some more authoritarian states,{{Which|date=February 2025}} loyal party membership may be required to have a say, or even basic rights and privileges.

=== Voter apathy ===
Voters may be discouraged from voting by weak cultural norms around voting. Countries without [[Compulsory voting|universal voting]] signal that voting is unimportant. A voting culture can be developed by reinforcing how voting is valued, expected and a centerpiece of a place's culture,<ref name=":6">{{Cite book |last1=Dionne |first1=E. J. Jr. |title=100% Democracy: The Case for Universal Voting |last2=Rapoport |first2=Miles |publisher=The New Press |others=Cornell William Brooks, Allegra Chapman, Joshua A. Douglas, Amber Herrle, Cecily Hines, Janai Nelson, Brenda Wright, Heather C. McGhee |year=2022 |isbn=978-1-62097-677-7 |location=New York |oclc=1252962012}}</ref> as peer pressure and a sense of belonging are powerful incentives to do something collectively.

Some proposals for reform include requiring that every selection have a 'none of the above' option, allow a wide range of valid excuses for not voting for conscientious objectors, and charging a low, non-compounding, non-criminal fee for those who do not vote or select a valid reason.<ref name=":6" />

=== Wasted votes ===
[[Plurality voting|Winner-take-all]] systems (unlike in systems with [[proportional representation]]), are especially vulnerable to weakening and [[Wasted vote|wasting certain votes year after year]].<ref>{{Cite book |last=Seabrook |first=Nick |title=One person, one vote : a surprising history of gerrymandering in America |date=2022 |isbn=978-0-593-31586-6 |publisher=Pantheon Books |edition=First |location=New York |oclc=1286675891}}</ref> This phenomenon also suppresses turnout for that and other elections help simultaneously in states that are not competitive, suppressing the popular vote for president in the US, for example, while lowering turnout in a host of other contests.<ref name=":1" /> In contrast, a [[parliamentary system]] typically significantly reduces wasted (suppressed) votes, helping to ensure more [[vote equality]] and encouraging greater overall participation.<ref name="Samuel Popkin 2001. P. 9702"/>

[[Referendum|Ballot referendum]] can also be a powerful avenue for changing political systems, for example, that are not as responsive to voters due to [[gerrymandering]] or other [[anti-democratic action]]s and policies.<ref>{{Cite news |title=Ballot measures on weed and abortion won in 2022. Now they're fueling a backlash |language=en |work=NPR.org |url=https://www.npr.org/2022/12/15/1142821226/ballot-weed-abortion-won-2022-fueling-backlash |access-date=2022-12-15}}</ref>

==By country==
===Australia===
[[Australian citizens]] are expected to [[Voter registration|enroll]] to vote, and it is their responsibility to update their enrollment when they change their address. Even so, an estimated 6% of eligible Australian voters are not enrolled or are enrolled incorrectly. They are disproportionately younger voters, many of whom might neglect to enroll when they attain [[voting age]].

In 2006, the [[Howard government]] legislated to close the electoral roll much earlier once an election was called than before. Previously, voters had been allowed seven days of grace after an election had been called to arrange or update their enrollment, but new voters were now allowed only until 8:00&nbsp;p.m. on the day that the electoral [[wtit of election|writ]] was issued to lodge their enrollment form, and those who needed to update their addresses were allowed three days. In [[Australia]], the [[Prime Minister of Australia|Prime Minister]] effectively has the right to determine the date of the election as long as constitutional rules regarding the maximum term of the parliament are adhered to. That measure was therefore likely to result in many newer voters being precluded from voting in the first election for which they were eligible because the time to arrange their enrollment once an election is called had been greatly reduced.

The measure was widely seen as an attempt at voter suppression aimed at younger voters<ref>Orr, Graeme [http://inside.org.au/court-by-surprise-the-high-court-upholds-voting-rights/ "Court by surprise: the High Court upholds voting rights"], 6 August 2010.</ref> since surveys had shown that younger voters are more likely than the general population to vote for the [[Australian Labor Party]] or the [[Australian Greens|Greens]] than Howard's [[Liberal Party of Australia|Liberal Party]].<ref>Brooker, Ron [http://resources.news.com.au/files/2011/07/22/1226099/942923-aus-file-young-voters.pdf "Youth Federal Election Voting Intentions: A Statistical and Graphical Analysis of Newspoll Quarterly Data 1996–2010"], The Whitlam Institute, June 2011</ref> The government denied that it was trying to suppress some voters and insisted that the purposes of the reform were a smoother administration of the elections and the reduction of the possibility of electoral fraud. However, the [[Australian Electoral Commission]] had requested no such reform, there had been no evidence of significant electoral fraud, and the Australian Electoral Commission had been dealing with hundreds of thousands of late enrollments without significant problems for decades.

In July 2010, the [[left-wing politics|left-wing]] lobby group [[GetUp!]] launched a challenge to the law. The [[High Court of Australia]] expedited the hearing so that a ruling could be made in time for the [[2010 Australian federal election|2010 federal election]]. The majority ruling struck down early closing of the roll and reinstated the old rule allowing voters seven days grace to arrange or update their [[Voter registration|enrollment]].

=== Brazil ===
{{further|2022 Brazilian general election#Voter suppression attempts}}
In the [[2022 Brazilian general election#Voter suppression attempts|2022 Brazilian general election]], there were attempts by police and political sympathisers to make it more difficult for lower-income people to attend polling stations. Some public transport services were temporary reduced,<ref>{{Cite web |title=PT teme que donos de empresas de ônibus pró-Bolsonaro reduzam frotas para sabotar eleitor de baixa renda | trans-title=PT fears that owners of pro-Bolsonaro bus companies will reduce fleets to sabotage low-income voters |url=https://theintercept.com/notas/pt-teme-que-empresas-de-onibus-pro-bolsonaro-reduzam-frotas/ |access-date=1 October 2022 |website=The Intercept Brasil | date=27 September 2022 |language=pt |archive-date=27 September 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220927183419/https://theintercept.com/notas/pt-teme-que-empresas-de-onibus-pro-bolsonaro-reduzam-frotas/ |url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Ministro do TSE chama de absurdo pedido da campanha de Bolsonaro de limitar transporte nas eleições | trans-title=TSE minister calls Bolsonaro campaign's request to limit transport in elections absurd |url=https://g1.globo.com/politica/eleicoes/2022/noticia/2022/10/01/ministro-do-tse-chama-de-absurdo-pedido-da-campanha-de-bolsonaro-de-limitar-transporte-nas-eleicoes.ghtml |access-date=2 October 2022 |website=G1 | date=October 2022 |language=pt |archive-date=2 October 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221002005655/https://g1.globo.com/politica/eleicoes/2022/noticia/2022/10/01/ministro-do-tse-chama-de-absurdo-pedido-da-campanha-de-bolsonaro-de-limitar-transporte-nas-eleicoes.ghtml |url-status=live}}</ref> spot inspections of vehicles and public transport were increased in poorer areas of the country,<ref>{{cite news | url=https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/brazil-highway-police-blockades-fan-voter-suppression-fears-2022-10-30/ | title=Brazil highway police blockades fan voter-suppression fears | work=Reuters | date=30 October 2022 | last=Stargardter | first=Gabriel|access-date=31 October 2022}}</ref><ref>{{cite web | last=Audi|first=Amanda|url=https://brazilian.report/liveblog/2022/10/30/alleged-voter-suppression-brazil/ | title=More details on alleged voter suppression case emerge | website=The Brazilian Report|date=30 October 2022 |access-date=31 October 2022}}</ref> and roadblocks set up to disrupt and delay traffic.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Downie|first1=Andrew|last2=Phillips|first2=Tom|date=30 October 2022|title=Brazil election: Lula's challenge hangs in balance amid voter suppression claims |url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/oct/30/brazil-election-lula-da-silva-jair-bolsonaro-voting-polls-president |access-date=31 October 2022 |work=The Guardian}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |date=30 October 2022 |title=Brazil election hit by outcry over roadblocks |url=https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20221030-brazil-election-hit-by-outcry-over-roadblocks |access-date=31 October 2022 |website=France 24 |publisher=Agence France-Presse}}</ref>

=== Canada ===
Shortly before the [[2011 Canadian federal election]], voter suppression tactics were [[2011 Canadian federal election voter suppression scandal|exercised by issuing robocalls and live calls]], which falsely advised voters that their polling station had been changed. The locations offered by those messages were intentionally false, often led voters several hours from the correct stations, and often identified themselves illegally as coming from [[Elections Canada]].<ref name="canconrobocall">{{cite news
  | title =Robocalls complaints came 3 days before 2011 election
  | publisher = CBC News
  | date =2012-11-19
  | url =https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/complaints-about-tory-calls-began-3-days-before-polls-opened-1.1162508
  | access-date = 2012-11-19 }}</ref> In litigation brought by the [[Council of Canadians]], a federal court found that such fraud had occurred and had probably been perpetrated by someone with access to the [[Conservative Party of Canada|Conservative Party]]'s voter database, including its information about voter preferences.<ref name="MacCharles">{{cite news | last = MacCharles| first = Tonda| title = Robocalls: Widespread but 'thinly scattered' vote suppression didn't affect election, judge rules| newspaper = [[Toronto Star]] | date = May 23, 2013 | url = https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2013/05/23/robocalls_widespread_but_thinly_scattered_vote_suppression_didnt_affect_election_judge_rules.html | access-date = 2013-05-27}}</ref> The court stated that the evidence did not prove that the Conservative Party or that its successful candidates had been directly involved,<ref name="MacCharles" /> but it criticized the Conservative Party for making "little effort to assist with the investigation."<ref name="MacCharles" /> The court did not annul the result in any of six [[Electoral district (Canada)|ridings]] where the fraud had occurred because it concluded that the number of votes affected had been too small to change the outcome.<ref name="MacCharles" />

=== France ===
In France, as in some other countries with [[Voter registration|Voter Registration]], requirements and processes to update your address suppress [[voter turnout]] disproportionately against people who move more often, who tend to be younger, for example.<ref>{{Cite web|title=Listes électorales : nouvelle inscription|trans-title=Election lists: new registration|url=https://www.service-public.fr/particuliers/vosdroits/F1367 |access-date=2021-05-15|website=www.service-public.fr|language=Fr}}</ref>

=== Israel ===
{{Further|April 2019 Israeli legislative election}}
In April 2019, during [[Israel]]'s general elections for the 21st [[Knesset]], [[Likud]] activists installed hidden cameras in polling stations in [[Arab citizens of Israel|Arab communities]].<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-5491778,00.html|title=Outrage as Likud activists secretly film voting in Arab communities|date=2019-09-04|website=Ynetnews|language=en|access-date=2019-04-10|last1=Azoulay|first1=Moran}}</ref> [[Election observers]] were seen wearing such cameras.<ref>{{Citation|last=ynet|title=משקיפים של הליכוד עם מצלמות נסתרות על מצביעים בקלפיות|date=2019-04-10|url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lr0pbIkoWuI |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/varchive/youtube/20211222/Lr0pbIkoWuI |archive-date=2021-12-22 |url-status=live|access-date=2019-04-10}}{{cbignore}}</ref> [[Hanan Melcer]], the Head of the General Elections Committee, called the cameras illegal.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.i24news.tv/en/news/israel/society/1554799171-fears-of-meddling-mounts-as-numerous-complaints-are-registered|title=i24NEWS|website=www.i24news.tv|access-date=2019-04-10}}</ref> The following day, the public relations agency Kaizler Inbar took credit for the operation and said it had been planned in collaboration with Likud. It claimed that voter turnout in Arab communities had fallen under 50% by the presence of the agency's observers in the polling stations,<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.facebook.com/Kaizler.Inbar/posts/441952923292920|title=קייזלר ענבר|website=www.facebook.com|language=en|access-date=2019-04-10}}</ref> though some of this decrease is likely due to a boycott that was planned for the vote.<ref>{{Cite web|title=Israel's young Arab citizens call for election boycott|url=https://www.jpost.com/israel-elections/israels-young-arab-citizens-call-for-election-boycott-585859|access-date=2020-07-05|website=The Jerusalem Post {{!}} JPost.com|date=5 April 2019 }}</ref>

===United Kingdom===
[[Lutfur Rahman (British politician)|Lutfur Rahman]] was the [[directly-elected mayor of Tower Hamlets]] for the [[British Labour Party]]. He was removed from office after being convicted of breaches of electoral law when his supporters intimidated voters at polling stations.<ref>{{Cite news|last1=Syal|first1=Rajeev|last2=Quinn|first2=Ben|date=2015-04-23|title=Met considers criminal inquiry into Tower Hamlets mayor Lutfur Rahman|language=en-GB|work=The Guardian|url=https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/apr/23/tower-hamlets-mayor-lutfur-rahman-found-guilty-of-electoral|access-date=2020-07-05|issn=0261-3077}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |date=23 April 2015 |title=Tower Hamlets election fraud mayor Lutfur Rahman removed from office |work=[[BBC News]] |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-32428648 |access-date=23 April 2015}}</ref>

===United States===
{{main|Voter suppression in the United States}}
In the [[United States]], elections are administered locally (though with many election rules set by states and the federal government), and forms of voter suppression vary among jurisdictions. When the country was founded, the right to vote in most states was limited to property-owning white males.<ref name="Carroll2003">Bret Carroll. ''[https://books.google.com/books?id=c5t2AwAAQBAJ&pg=PA89 American Masculinities: A Historical Encyclopedia]''. SAGE Publications; 14 October 2003. {{ISBN|978-1-4522-6571-1}}. p. 89.</ref> Over time, the right to vote was granted to racial minorities, women, and youth.<ref name="Rivers2012">Christina Rivers. ''[https://books.google.com/books?id=q-666oIQaQUC&pg=PA148 The Congressional Black Caucus, Minority Voting Rights, and the U.S. Supreme Court]''. University of Michigan Press; 17 July 2012. {{ISBN|0-472-11810-2}}. pp. 146–48.</ref><ref name="Macbain-Stephens2006">Jennifer Macbain-Stephens. ''[https://books.google.com/books?id=eB6sDQIBUdoC Women's Suffrage: Giving the Right to Vote to All Americans]''. Rosen Classroom; January 2006. {{ISBN|978-1-4042-0869-8}}.</ref><ref name="Amendments1970">United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on the Judiciary. Subcommittee on Constitutional Amendments. ''[https://books.google.com/books?id=-acTAAAAIAAJ Lowering the voting age to 18: Hearings, Ninety-first Congress, second session]''. U.S. Govt. Print. Off. 1970.</ref>

In the late 19th and the early 20th centuries, Southern states passed [[Jim Crow laws]] to suppress poor and racial minority voters that involved [[Poll tax (United States)|poll taxes]], [[literacy tests]], and [[grandfather clauses]].<ref name="Johnson2010">Kimberley Johnson. ''[https://books.google.com/books?id=dnfNBgAAQBAJ&pg=PT97 Reforming Jim Crow: Southern Politics and State in the Age Before Brown]''. Oxford University Press; 16 April 2010. {{ISBN|978-0-19-988904-4}}. p. 97.</ref><ref name="Klarman2004">Michael J. Klarman. ''[https://books.google.com/books?id=WWl0aWMSWSMC&pg=PA70 From Jim Crow to Civil Rights: The Supreme Court and the Struggle for Racial Equality]''. Oxford University Press; 5 February 2004. {{ISBN|978-0-19-535167-5}}. p. 70.</ref><ref name="Hazen2004">Walter Hazen. ''[https://books.google.com/books?id=64PxCgAAQBAJ&pg=PA38 The Civil War to the Jim Crow Laws: American Black History]''. Milliken Publishing Company; 1 September 2004. {{ISBN|978-0-7877-2730-7}}. p. 38.</ref> Most of those voter suppression tactics were made illegal after the enactment of the [[Voting Rights Act of 1965]]. Even after the repeal of those statutes, there have been repeated incidents of racial discrimination against voters, especially in the South. For example, 87,000 people in Georgia were unable to vote in 2018 because of late registration. Many of the strictest voting regulations are in swing states and have been enacted primarily by [[U.S. Republican Party]] politicians.<ref name="caputo et al">{{Cite web|author1=Angela Caputo |author2=Geoff Hing |author3=Johnny Kauffman|title=A Georgia law prevented 87,000 people from voting last year. And it could have a big impact in 2020|url=https://www.apmreports.org/story/2019/10/28/georgia-voting-deadlines-2020-election|access-date=2020-10-07|website=www.apmreports.org}}</ref> According to [[American Public Media|AMP]] Reports, many people who were predicted to be in favor of voting for the [[U.S. Democratic Party]] had their ballot dismissed. The study's analysis noted, "A disproportionate number of those potential voters were people of color or young voters, groups that typically favor Democrats."<ref name="caputo et al"/> The history of the previous Jim Crow regulations in the Southern states affects the voter suppression today because minorities often have their vote dismissed by the manipulation of voting regulations.<ref>{{Cite web|title=Constitutional Rights Foundation|url=https://www.crf-usa.org/black-history-month/race-and-voting-in-the-segregated-south|access-date=2020-10-07|website=www.crf-usa.org}}</ref>

One analysis of a Florida election in 2012 found that 200,000+ people did not vote because of long lines.<ref name="Powers">{{cite news |last=Powers |first=Scott |author2=David Damron |date=January 29, 2013 |title=Analysis: 201,000 in Florida didn't vote because of long lines |newspaper=[[Orlando Sentinel]] |location=Orlando, Florida |url=https://www.orlandosentinel.com/2013/01/29/analysis-201000-in-florida-didnt-vote-because-of-long-lines/ |access-date=2016-02-26}}</ref> Some Floridians were forced to wait 6–7 hours to vote.<ref name=":5"/>

In 2013, after the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] struck down Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act, several states enacted [[voter ID]] laws. Some argue that such laws amount to voter suppression against African-Americans.<ref>{{cite news|last1=Childress|first1=Sarah|title=With Voting Rights Act Out, States Push Voter ID Laws|url=https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/with-voting-rights-act-out-states-push-voter-id-laws/|work=FRONTLINE|publisher=PBS|date=June 26, 2013}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|last1=Childress|first1=Sarah|title=Supreme Court Strikes Blow to Voting Rights Act: What's Next?|url=https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/supreme-court-strikes-blow-to-voting-rights-act-whats-next/|work=FRONTLINE|publisher=PBS|date=June 25, 2013}}</ref>

In Texas, a voter ID law requiring a driver's license, passport, military identification, or gun permit was repeatedly found to be intentionally discriminatory. However, the DOJ expressed support for Texas's ID law.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/08/a-court-strikes-down-texass-voter-id-law-for-the-fifth-time/537792/|title=A Court Strikes Down Texas's Voter ID Law For the Fifth Time|date=August 24, 2017|website=The Atlantic}}</ref> A similar ID law in North Dakota, which would have disenfranchised many [[Native Americans in the United States|Native Americans]], was also overturned.<ref name="nprvote">{{cite web |website=NPR |date=August 2, 2016 |title=As November Approaches, Courts Deal Series Of Blows To Voter ID Laws |url=https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/08/02/488392765/as-november-approaches-courts-deal-series-of-blows-to-voter-id-laws}}</ref>

In Wisconsin, a federal judge found that the state's restrictive voter ID law had led to "real incidents of disenfranchisement, which undermine rather than enhance confidence in elections, particularly in minority communities."<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://hyp.is/Mrc_rAC9EeiVTFMDt_YwQA/elections.wi.gov/sites/default/files/news/petersonruling_pdf_14890.pdf|title=Case: 3:15-cv-00324-jdp Document #: 234 In the United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin|access-date=January 23, 2018}}</ref> Since there was no evidence of widespread voter impersonation in Wisconsin, it found that the law was "a cure worse than the disease". In addition to imposing strict voter ID requirements, the law reduced [[Early voting#United States|early voting]], required people to live in a ward for at least 28 days before voting, and prohibited emailing absentee ballots to voters.<ref name="nprvote" />

Other controversial measures include shutting down [[Department of Motor Vehicles]] (DMV) offices in minority neighborhoods, which makes it more difficult for residents to obtain voter IDs;<ref>{{cite web |website=CNN |title=DOT launches investigation in Alabama over DMV closures |date=December 9, 2015 |url=http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/09/politics/alabama-dmv-closures-voting-rights/index.html}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |website=Esquire |title=The State of Alabama Has Fully Lost Its Mind |date=April 12, 2017 |url=http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/news/a54465/alabama-bentley-resign-church-police/}}</ref> shutting down polling places in minority neighborhoods;<ref>{{cite web |website=The Nation |title=There Are 868 Fewer Places to Vote in 2016 Because the Supreme Court Gutted the Voting Rights Act |date=November 4, 2016 |url=https://www.thenation.com/article/there-are-868-fewer-places-to-vote-in-2016-because-the-supreme-court-gutted-the-voting-rights-act/}}</ref> systematically depriving precincts in minority neighborhoods of the resources needed to operate efficiently, such as poll workers and voting machines;<ref>{{cite news |newspaper=The New York Times |title=Long Lines at Minority Polling Places |date=September 24, 2014 |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/25/opinion/long-lines-at-minority-polling-places.html?_r=1}}</ref> and purging voters from the rolls shortly before an election.<ref>{{cite news |newspaper=The New York Times |title=Ruling Preserves Voting Rights for Thousands in North Carolina |date=November 4, 2016 |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/05/us/north-carolina-voting-rights.html?_r=0}}</ref>

Often, voter fraud is cited as a justification for such laws even if the incidence is low. In Iowa, lawmakers passed a strict voter ID law with the potential to disenfranchise 260,000 voters. Out of 1.6 million votes cast in Iowa in 2016, there were only 10 allegations of voter fraud, none of which being cases of impersonation that a voter ID law could have prevented. Iowa Secretary of State Paul Pate, the architect of the bill, stated "we've not experienced widespread voter fraud in Iowa".<ref>{{cite web |website=The Nation |title=Iowa's New Voter-ID Law Would Have Disenfranchised My Grandmother |date=April 13, 2017 |url=https://www.thenation.com/article/iowas-new-voter-id-law-would-have-disenfranchised-my-grandmother/}}</ref>

In May 2017, US President [[Donald Trump]] established the [[Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity]] for the purpose of preventing voter fraud. Critics have suggested its true purpose is voter suppression. The commission was led by Kansas Secretary of State [[Kris Kobach]], a staunch advocate of strict voter ID laws and a proponent of the Crosscheck system. Crosscheck is a national database, which is designed to check for voters who are registered in more than one state by comparing names and dates of birth. Researchers at Stanford University, the University of Pennsylvania, Harvard University, and Microsoft found that for every legitimate instance of double registration it finds, Crosscheck's algorithm returns approximately 200 false positives.<ref>{{cite news |newspaper=The Washington Post |date=June 30, 2017 |title=How Trump's nationwide voter data request could lead to voter suppression |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/06/30/how-trumps-nationwide-voter-data-request-could-lead-to-voter-suppression/}}</ref> Kobach has been repeatedly sued by the [[American Civil Liberties Union]] (ACLU) for trying to restrict voting rights in Kansas.<ref>{{cite news |newspaper=The New York Times |date=June 13, 2017 |title=The Man Behind Trump's Voter-Fraud Obsession |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/13/magazine/the-man-behind-trumps-voter-fraud-obsession.html}}</ref><ref>{{cite news| url= https://theintercept.com/2016/10/27/voter-suppression-is-the-real-election-scandal/ |title=Voter Suppression is the Real Election Scandal| work=[[The Intercept]]|date= October 27, 2016| author=Speri, Alice}}</ref>

==See also==
* [[Authoritarianism]]
* [[Hybrid regime]]
* [[Democratic backsliding]]
* [[Electoral fraud]]
* [[Gerrymandering]]
* [[Unfair election]]
* [[Vote equality]]
* [[Voter caging]]

==Further reading==
* Rick L. Hasen. 2020. ''Election Meltdown: Dirty Tricks, Distrust, and the Threat to American Democracy''. Yale University Press.

==References==
{{reflist}}

==External links==
* {{citation |work=[[Core.ac.uk]] |quote= [[Open access]] research papers |url= https://core.ac.uk/search?q=%22voter%2Bsuppression%22 |title= Voter+suppression }} {{open access}}

{{Corruption}}
{{Discrimination}}
{{Authority control}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Voter Suppression}}
[[Category:Voter suppression| ]]
[[Category:Political campaign techniques]]
[[Category:Political corruption]]
[[Category:Electoral fraud]]
[[Category:Discrimination]]
[[Category:Injustice]]