On March 3, the American Bar Association (ABA) kicked off its annual Law Day celebration with a livestream broadcast during which ABA President Patricia Refo introduced this year’s theme and highlighted some suitable programming options. Law Day, a national day set aside to celebrate the legal system, its contribution to American governance, and the rights and freedoms it has engendered, has been celebrated annually since 1961 when Congress passed a joint resolution designating May 1 as Law Day, U.S.A. To help cultivate an appreciation and understanding of the law and all that it encompasses, organizers at the ABA have developed themes with activities and programs centered around that theme. This year’s theme, Advancing the Rule of Law Now, advocates the role that each of us plays in promoting the rule of law, defending liberty, and pursuing justice.

This year’s Law Day celebration commemorates the centennial of the 19th Amendment, which guaranteed that the right to vote could not be denied or abridged on the basis of sex. The success in gaining the right to vote was a culmination of a women’s rights movement that began nearly a century before, predating the United States Civil War. The road to equality was a rough one, interrupted and tempered by a period of turmoil in United States history. The period between the beginning of the women’s suffrage movement to its ultimate success with the adoption of the 19th Amendment on August 26, 1920, saw the country torn apart by civil war, bear the assassination of a president, endure the pains of the Reconstruction era, fight in a world war, and suffer through a global influenza epidemic.

Today in 2020, we are facing another global pandemic that has forced the world to alter the way its citizens live, work, and play. There are lockdowns and stay-at-home orders, social distancing rules, and mandatory mask-wearing requirements. Among all of this upheaval we are reminded that this is a presidential election year. This is not the first time that our country had to make difficult choices in balancing the public’s health and safety with the public’s right to vote. The 1918 influenza pandemic began in the spring of 1918, but there was a resurgence of cases once fall arrived. In October 1918 alone, 195,000 Americans died. What did all of this mean for the women who were clamoring for the right to vote and Americans who were looking to show their patriotism by casting a ballot in the November 1918 midterm elections? History showed that the word still got out. Quarantines, business shutdowns, and bans on public gatherings did not deter the suffragists in their crusade for equal voting rights and the opportunity to participate in the electoral process. Although the 1918 pandemic had the potential to derail their efforts, the women changed course, and instead of train tours and public speaking rallies, they turned to leafletting and newspaper advertising to draw attention to their cause. Relying upon wartime sentiment, they stressed patriotism and emphasized presidential support and urged eligible male voters to cast their votes in favor of the referendums pending in four states. Despite a much lower voter turnout due to the pandemic, suffrage referendums passed in three of the four states.

How then did the United States manage to hold an election during a time when an epidemic was ravaging the nation and killing thousands? It wasn’t easy. Most reports indicated that the flu peaked just before the November 5 election. Thus, to carry out these mid-term elections, certain precautions had to be taken on Election Day to ensure that the health and safety of the voters would not be compromised. Measures, such as social distancing and mandatory mask-wearing, were put in place. However, even with these planned precautions, some polls could not open because there were too many infected people suffering with the flu. The conditions on Election Day were also dependent upon one’s location in the country. By that time, many cities on the East Coast were easing their restrictions as the flu’s peak was passing. The pandemic’s toll shows up in the number of people voting. Approximately, 40% percent of the voting population turned out for the election. Although the lower voter turnout did not affect the legitimacy of the election itself, would it have been better to postpone the election until more voters could safely cast their ballot?

Here, in 2020, states are grappling with how to handle the upcoming elections in light of the coronavirus. Of course, the general election is still months away. However, states need to consider how to manage a presidential election at a time when the nation could be facing a resurgence of the coronavirus. The National Conference of State Legislatures has compiled a list of legislative actions and executive actions that have ben issued in response to the pandemic threat. Some states have submitted bills to postpone the primary elections and to allow absentee and mail voting for more than just limited members of the population for the general election. No one can say for certain what the conditions will be like on Election Day in November, but it’s important for states to be prepared. The suffragists worked hard to win the right to vote for women. Now, it’s up to our governments to determine how its citizens can exercise that right to vote in a manner that ensures not only the safety of the voters and poll workers but also maintains the integrity of the election itself. In that way, it can truly be our vote, our voice, our democracy.

Ex Libris Juris - HCLL Blog