ThinkProgress has documented how Alabama’s anti-immigrant law, HB 56, makes it illegal undocumented immigrants to access water in their homes or live in their homes. Even tasks as small as getting a library card require proof of citizenship.

Now the Immigration Policy Center has a new report out taking a closer look at the provisions in the state’s harmful law that make it virtually impossible for an undocumented immigrant to live in Alabama — and will likely lead “increase of exploitation of workers, erosion of fundamental legal protections, and denial of access to state and local government services and activities,” according to Joan Friedland, the report’s author.

The law makes it a felony for an undocumented immigrant to “attempt to enter into a business transaction with the state or a political subdivision of the state.” Yet, the term “business transactions” in the Alabama law is so broad that it’s applying to courts as well, which, as Friedland writes, would mean that an undocumented woman would not be able to change her name after divorcing her abusive husband or apply for the probate of her deceased husband’s will.

Additionally, the law prohibits courts from enforcing a contract between lawful and unlawful residents. This would harm both undocumented immigrants and U.S. citizens who would have no recourse. As Friedland explains:

• An unauthorized victim of domestic violence who has hired a lawyer to apply for legal status would have no recourse if the lawyer ran off with her money and did not do the work. And the lawyer would have no recourse if she did the work and the unauthorized client did not pay her.
• A landlord might be free to lease an apartment to an unauthorized person, because the judge enjoined Section 13, which would have made merely renting an apartment to an unlawfully present person the crime of harboring. But the tenant might not be able to enforce the terms of the lease, including those pertaining to health and safety, or even stay in the apartment despite payment of rent. And the landlord might not be able to compel payment of the rent.
• An unauthorized person who told a buyer he was leaving the state because of HB 56 and was trying to sell his house would have no recourse if the buyer demanded at the last minute that the seller accept less than the price that had been agreed to in writing. And the buyer would have no recourse if he paid the asking price, and the seller refused to sign the deed, and their real estate agents would not be able to compel payment of their commissions.

No federal judge has struck down the contracts provision, but a state judge found the contract provision to be unconstitutional in at least some contexts, quoting the state constitution’s guarantee that, “[t]here can be no law of this state impairing the obligation of contracts by destroying or impairing the remedy for their enforcement.”

It’s not surprising that Republicans leaped to presidential candidate Herman Cain’s defense after allegations that he sexually harassed some of his employees in the 1990s resurfaced this week, despite the fact that those allegations have neither been proven or disproven. Many Republicans, however, have gone much further — claiming that sexual harassment allegations are, in Rush Limbaugh’s words, “a political tool of the left to get rid of people, or to score money gains.” Americans for Herman Cain blasted out a fundraising email headlined, “Don’t let the media ‘lynch’ another black Conservative.” And the National Review actually published this gem:

There has never in the history of the world been a people better mannered and less inclined to insulting acts of prejudice than today’s Americans, yet we’re supposed to believe that the nation is seething with “harassment” and “discrimination,” women being groped in every business office and crosses burning on every lawn. For Heaven’s sake. Aren’t there any grown-ups around?

Herman Cain’s many apologists are deeply and tragically wrong. A recent University of Michigan study found that nine in 10 women workers will experience “offensive sexist remarks or being told that they could not do their job properly due to their sex,” and the women who only endure these conditions will be the lucky ones. A massive one in 10 women in the workplace will at some point be “promised promotion or better treatment if they [are] ‘sexually cooperative‘” with a co-worker or supervisor.

Yet, despite the fact that the very worst kind of sexual harassment is shockingly common, the GOP’s inability to recognize it is hardly limited to Team Cain. Failed Reagan Supreme Court nominee Robert Bork, who is one of Gov. Mitt Romney’s top legal advisors, recently claimed that women “aren’t discriminated against anymore.”

In 2006, when George W. Bush was president, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives launched the first of a series of misguided sting operations where illegal guns were sold in the expectation that they could be tracked to drug traders. Instead, the agents lost track of the guns, and at least two of these guns were likely later used to kill a federal agent.

This series of operations, which includes the “Fast and Furious” operation, were deeply botched. They should never have been executed and the government officials found responsible for them have correctly been removed from their jobs or demoted. None of these officials are Eric Holder. As Attorney General, Holder supervises nearly 112,000 employees. It is neither desirable for him to be aware of every single operation being conducted by low-level field agents, nor would it even be physically possible to brief him on all of these operations if he wanted to be.

Nevertheless, congressional Republicans believe they can somehow blow this botched operation up into a major political scandal for Holder simply through repeated use of hyperbole. In an interview with Fox News this morning, Rep. Paul Broun (R-GA) made the most outlandish claim to date — that Holder should not only lose his job, he should also face criminal charges:

It’s getting blatantly evident that Eric Holder’s broken the law. He’s lied to Congress. He should resign. He should be prosecuted for lying to Congress. And he should be disbarred. The president ought to call Eric Holder into his office and fire him today.

Watch it:

There is no basis for Broun’s claim that Holder somehow lied to Congress. Last May, Holder testified that he only recently learned about the nature of the Fast and Furious operation. Several lawmakers since accused Holder of perjury after they uncovered a July 2010 memo to Holder that mentioned the name of the operation but didn’t actually explain what the operation was. This memo, however, could no more have informed Holder about the operation’s misguided tactics than the fact that this blog post contains the words “Buffy the Vampire Slayer” would inform anyone who Willow Rosenberg is. It is far too generous to say that Broun is grasping at straws.

Yet, while Broun’s blovating has no chance whatsoever of pinning this botched operation on Holder, it could have a very real impact on the Department’s ability to ensure that this kind of mistake never happens again. So far, the Department appears to have acted responsibly by investigating the operation and removing the people responsible for it. Nothing, however, chills an investigation into a legitimately troubling incident more than an army of witchhunters who care more about embarrassing senior officials than they do about learning the truth.

Republican lawmakers across the country have been waging an successful campaign to restrict the right to vote. States are cracking down on non-profit organizations’ registration drives, reducing early voting periods, and repealing laws allowing citizens to register to vote at the polls on Election day, leaving as many as 5 million voters facing disenfranchisement in the 2012 election. Perhaps the most radical restriction is the GOP’s push for voter ID laws that require citizens to obtain and present state-approved photo identification to vote. These laws disproportionately (and perhaps purposefully) affect minorities, seniors, and low-income people who typically make up the Democratic base. At least six states have passed such restrictions.

Incensed by the regressive trend, civil rights leader Rep. John Lewis (D-GA) put the Republican efforts into historical context. “In 2011, we should be ashamed,” he said Tuesday night on the House floor. “We should be making it easy, simple, and convenient to vote. Instead we’re creating barriers and making it more difficult.” Noting that “we cannot separate the dangerous trend across this nation from our history,” Lewis warned of our “step backward towards another dark time in our history.” Singling out the voter ID laws as a particular “threat,” Lewis reiterated, “Make no mistake, these voter ID laws are a poll tax. I know what I saw during the 60s“:

LEWIS: Each and every voter ID law is a real threat to voting rights in America. Make no mistake, these voter ID laws are a poll tax. I know what I saw during the 60s. I saw poll tax. And you cannot deny that these ID laws are another form of a poll tax. In an economy where people are already struggling to pay for the most basic necessities, there are too many citizens that would be unable to afford the fees and transportation costs involved in getting government issued photo Ids. Despite all the voter ID laws across the country, there’s no convincing evidence — no evidence at all — that voter fraud is a problem in our election problem.

The right to vote is precious — almost sacred — and one of the most important blessings of our democracy. Today, we must stand up and fight. The history of the right to vote in America is a history of conflict, of struggle, for that right. Many people died trying to protect that right. I was beaten and jailed because I stood up for it. For millions like me, the struggle for the right to vote is not mere history, it is experience.

Watch it:

Since he was 21 years old, Lewis has been a seminal leader in the non-violent struggle to achieve voter and racial equality in this country. He “endured brutal beatings by angry mobs and suffered a fractured skull,” and was nearly beaten to death to achieve a basic freedom that is once again being infringed upon today.

Rep. Marcia Fudge (D-OH), who has been leading the House effort against voter ID restrictions, reflected on Lewis’ words: “Congressman Lewis has risked his life to ensure that every American has the right to vote. His bravery should stand as an inspiration to us all to continue the fight against Republican efforts to suppress voting. His perspective on this issue is invaluable.”

This is the third installment in an ongoing series on voting rights leading up to Election Day 2011.

Next week, Maine citizens will vote on a ballot initiative to strike down a Republican-passed bill to repeal election day voter registration in the state.

Question 1 will be on the ballot after thousands of volunteers collected over 50,000 signatures to call a citizen’s veto on LD 1376, which narrowly passed the Republican-controlled statehouse in June.

But as Mainers work the phones and knock on doors in droves this week — a representative from the Yes On 1 campaign told ThinkProgress they had over 500 volunteers — opponents of election day registration (EDR) have brought in a massive influx of secret conservative money to influence the vote.

On Monday, the No On 1 campaign reported a massive advertising expenditure — over $250,000 in total. Here is just a sampling of the new purchases:

The timing of the purchase, however, raises red flags. Maine election law mandates that groups disclose the names of its donors up until 11 days before the election, but within 11 days, only expenditures must be reported. This new quarter-million dollar contribution came nine days prior to the vote, allowing the source of the money to remain hidden.

In a cheap-advertising state like Maine, $250,000 will likely go a long way in influencing the results. The most recent poll found a tight race, with EDR’s proponents holding just a 4-point lead, 48-44.

Supporters of Question 1 are hoping volunteers will be able to rally support for the state’s long-held EDR law. Maine (along with Minnesota) became the first state in the nation to pass election day registration in 1973. During the subsequent 38 years, EDR has produced a major boost in voter turnout while also preventing fraud. (Just two cases of voter fraud have occurred in Maine over the past 20 years.) It allows thousands of Mainers who need to initiate or update their voter registration file to do so on election day, an option especially important for those who work during normal business hours and can’t take time off during the day to go to the town clerk.

ThinkProgress has been traveling around Maine this week to speak with citizens about the EDR battle. Stay tuned for more coverage.