In a closely watched voting rights case with national implications, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has reversed a lower court decision and upheld Texas’s 2021 law requiring voters to include specific identification numbers on both their mail-in ballot applications and the ballots themselves.
The ruling, issued August 4, 2025, is considered precedent-setting within the Fifth Circuit, which covers Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi. It aligns with similar reasoning from the Third Circuit and could influence future challenges to absentee voting laws across the country.
From Legislative Floor to Courtroom
The law at the center of the dispute—the Election Protection and Integrity Act of 2021—was passed in response to concerns about the security of mail-in ballots, which Texas officials and lawmakers have long described as vulnerable to fraud.
Before the 2021 law, Texans voting by mail were required to submit an application with their name, address, and eligibility category, such as being over 65, having a disability, or being absent from the county during the voting period. Critics argued that because basic voter information is publicly available, the old system left the door open for bad actors to obtain that data, request ballots in others’ names, and potentially cast fraudulent votes without detection.
The 2021 Act added a new safeguard: voters must provide either their Texas driver’s license or personal ID number—known as a DPS number—or the last four digits of their Social Security number on both the application and the return envelope containing their ballot. These numbers must match the information already on file in the state’s voter registration database.
The Lawsuit and Lower Court Ruling
The law’s opponents—including OCA-Greater Houston, the League of Women Voters of Texas, REVUP-Texas, and the U.S. Department of Justice—filed suit almost immediately after the bill was signed. They argued the number-matching rule violated the “materiality provision” of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. That provision prohibits officials from denying someone the right to vote because of an error or omission on paperwork if the error is not material to determining whether they are legally qualified to vote.
In 2023, U.S. District Judge Xavier Rodriguez sided with the plaintiffs, holding that a DPS or Social Security number “cannot offer any information about a voter’s substantive eligibility” and therefore was not material under federal law. He issued an injunction blocking Texas from enforcing the requirement.
Fifth Circuit: ID Numbers Are Material to Voter Qualification
Writing for the appeals court, Judge James C. Ho rejected that reasoning. Citing earlier cases, including Veasey v. Perry and the bipartisan Carter-Baker Commission on Federal Election Reform, Ho emphasized that “mail-in ballots are not secure” and have been repeatedly identified as “particularly susceptible to fraud.”
“The ID number requirement is obviously designed to confirm that each mail-in voter is precisely who he claims he is,” Ho wrote. “And that is plainly material to determining whether such individual is qualified under State law to vote.”
The court noted that under Texas law, a voter’s identity verification is part of determining qualification, and an ID number directly serves that purpose.
Precedent Beyond Texas
The Fifth Circuit’s reasoning closely tracks a 2024 Third Circuit decision in Pennsylvania State Conference of NAACP Branches v. Secretary of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, which held that the materiality provision applies only to the voter qualification process—not to procedures in the actual casting of a ballot.
By adopting that interpretation, the Fifth Circuit has reinforced a legal split between federal appeals courts, increasing the chances the U.S. Supreme Court could take up the issue to resolve differing interpretations of the Civil Rights Act.
The Court’s Legal Test
The opinion also reaffirmed a two-step test the Fifth Circuit articulated last year in Vote.Org v. Callanen for assessing materiality under the Civil Rights Act:
- There must be no “total disconnect” between the state’s stated interests and the statute enacted.
- The law must “meaningfully correspond” to legitimate state interests without imposing pointless burdens.
Applying that test, the court found Texas’s law directly advances its interest in preventing mail-in ballot fraud and in ensuring each ballot is cast by the registered voter, not someone else.
While plaintiffs argued the state provided little evidence that the rule would reduce fraud, the court deferred to Texas’s discretion in determining how much security is enough, citing its “considerable discretion” to protect election integrity.
Procedural Complications and Sovereign Immunity
The case also involved procedural disputes. Texas argued the district court lacked jurisdiction to rule on some of the claims because the state had already appealed the denial of sovereign immunity in a related case. The Fifth Circuit agreed in part, concluding the lower court did not have jurisdiction over certain private plaintiffs’ claims against the Secretary of State while that appeal was pending. However, this did not prevent the appellate court from deciding the core legal question on the merits.
Implications for Voters
Voting rights advocates warn the ruling could increase ballot rejection rates, particularly for elderly and disabled voters—two groups that rely heavily on absentee voting. In the 2022 midterm elections, during partial enforcement of the law before the injunction, some counties reported thousands of rejected mail-in ballots due to ID mismatches or missing numbers.
Supporters counter that the law includes a process to correct errors and that the measure is essential to prevent potential fraud in a system that lacks the safeguards of in-person voting.
What’s Next
Because the Fifth Circuit’s ruling aligns with the Third Circuit but conflicts with other interpretations in different jurisdictions, legal experts say the case could be headed for the U.S. Supreme Court. A high court decision could clarify whether the Civil Rights Act’s materiality provision applies to procedural requirements in absentee voting—or is limited to the initial voter registration process.
For now, Texas counties will be required to enforce the ID number matching rule in upcoming elections, making this ruling not only a political and legal victory for the state but also a turning point in the national debate over how far states can go to regulate mail-in voting.
Disclaimer
The content provided in this publication is for educational and informational purposes only. The Hawk’s Eye – Consulting & News strives to deliver accurate and impactful stories. However, readers are advised to seek professional legal counsel and guidance for their specific legal inquiries and concerns. The publication does not assume any responsibility for actions taken by individuals based on the information presented.
Additionally, while every effort is made to ensure the reliability of the information, the publication does not warrant the completeness, accuracy, or timeliness of the content. Readers are encouraged to verify any legal information with official sources and to use their discretion when interpreting and applying the information provided.
A Couple of Our Other Reads
You may be interested in our publishing on the 772 arrest notifications TCOLE received in 2024..
Or you may find our publishing on a newly elected Texas sheriff’s battle with TCOLE over the accuracy of his personal history statement of interest.
Follow Us on Social Media
If you are interested in staying updated on matters about your government in Texas and other important stories, trust The Hawk’s Eye – Consulting & News to provide reliable information that matters to you. You can follow us on social media platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, X, Reddit, YouTube, Tumblr, and LinkedIn to stay connected and informed.
FACEBOOK: TheHawksEyeNews
INSTAGRAM: Hawk_s_Eye_C_and_N
X: TheHawksEyeNews
REDDIT: TheHawksEyeCN
YOUTUBE: The Hawk’s Eye – Consulting & News
TUMBLR: The Hawk’s Eye – Consulting & News
LINKEDIN: The Hawk’s Eye – Consulting & News
Table of Contents
Discover more from The Hawk’s Eye - Consulting & News | A Texas News Source
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.