Wisconsin judge says paper absentee ballots discriminate against certain disabled voters
A Dane County judge found that Wisconsin’s paper-only absentee voting system violates the rights of some disabled voters, but stopped short of mandating electronic ballots.
In Madison, Dane County Circuit Judge Everett Mitchell concluded that Wisconsin’s current absentee voting process, which relies solely on paper ballots, infringes on the rights of disabled voters who cannot mark a ballot without assistance. While acknowledging the discrimination, he did not compel the Elections Commission to implement an electronic voting option, citing ongoing disagreements about its practicality and potential hazards.
The ruling stems from a lawsuit filed in 2024 by Disability Rights Wisconsin, the League of Women Voters, and four disabled individuals, who argue the lack of an electronic alternative violates the Americans with Disabilities Act. Mitchell had previously issued a temporary injunction ordering electronic ballots, but an appellate court reversed that order for disrupting the status quo. No estimates exist on how many disabled voters would request electronic ballots, and both the elections commission and the Wisconsin Department of Justice have not responded to comment requests. A hearing on August 12 will set a possible trial date, though resolution is unlikely before the November election.
Why it matters
The decision highlights ongoing legal battles over voting accessibility for disabled citizens in Wisconsin.
How the sides frame it
HIGH AGREEMENTBoth camps report the judge’s finding that paper absentee ballots discriminate against disabled voters and note he did not order electronic ballots, but the right-leaning coverage adds emphasis on practicality, security concerns and the timing of any reform.
LEFT
Highlights the discrimination against disabled voters and the judge’s decision to refrain from mandating electronic ballots pending further debate.
RIGHT
Characterizes paper absentee ballots as a failure for disabled voters and stresses the judge’s hesitation to require e-ballots because of practicality, security and timing issues.
The left emphasises
- paper absentee ballots infringe on disabled voters' rights
- judge acknowledges discrimination but stops short of ordering e-ballots
- cites ongoing disagreements about practicality and hazards
The right emphasises
- paper absentee ballots fail disabled voters by preventing private voting
- judge stops short of mandating e-ballots due to practicality and security concerns
- any reform unlikely to be ready for the November midterm elections
In this story