Earlier this month, the U.S. Department of Justice blocked a new Texas state law that would institute strict photo identification requirements for all citizens trying to vote. The DOJ refused to grant the law pre-clearance under the Voting Rights Act, noting that the bill would unfairly disenfranchise Hispanic voters.

Supporters of the bill say the law is needed to prevent voter impersonation. Gov. Rick Perry (R-TX) argued:

Texas has a responsibility to ensure elections are fair, beyond reproach and accurately reflect the will of voters. The DOJ has no valid reason for rejecting this important law, which requires nothing more extensive than the type of photo identification necessary to receive a library card or board an airplane. Their denial is yet another example of the Obama administration’s continuing and pervasive federal overreach.

How big has the problem been? According to the San Antonio Express-News:

Fewer than five “illegal voting” complaints involving voter impersonations were filed with the Texas Attorney General’s Office from the 2008 and 2010 general elections in which more than 13 million voters participated.

The Texas attorney general’s office did not give the outcome of the four illegal voting complaints that were filed. Only one remains pending, according to agency records.

And as ThinkProgress Justice previously reported, more people than that have been denied their right to vote due to these sorts of strict voter ID laws.

Though Perry has claimed Texas has endured “multiple cases” of voter fraud, even of the paltry 20 election law violation allegations the state’s attorney general handled in the 2008 and 2010 elections, most related to mail-in ballot or campaign finance violations, electioneering too close to a polling place, and a voter blocked by an election worker.

It is unclear how many Texans attempt to illegally check out library books while impersonating neighbors or dead people, each year. But in a state of more than 25 million people, the odds of being even accused of voter impersonation in the Lone Star State are less than one in 6,250,000.

Over the last 48 hours, there has been a sustained effort to smear Trayvon Martin, the 17-year old African-American who was shot dead by George Zimmerman a month ago. Martin’s mother, Sybrina Fulton, said, “They killed my son, now they’re trying to kill his reputation.”

Thus far these attacks have fallen into two categories: false and irrelevant. Much of this leaked information seems intended to play into stereotypes about young African-American males. Here’s what everyone should know:

1. Prominent conservative websites published fake photos of Martin. Twitchy, a new website run by prominent conservative blogger Michelle Malkin, promoted a photo — purportedly from Martin’s Facebook page — that shows Martin in saggy pants and flipping the bird. The photo, which spread quickly on conservative websites and Twitter, is intended to paint Martin as a thug. As Twitchy later acknowledged, it is not a photo of Trayvon Martin. [Examiner]

2. The Sanford Police selectively leaked irrelevant, negative information about Martin. The authorities told the Orlando Sentinel this morning that Trayvon was suspended from school for ten days “after being found with an empty marijuana baggie.” There is no evidence that Martin was under the influence of drugs at the time of his death, nor would prior possession of marijuana be a reason for killing him. It’s unclear what the relevance of the leak was, other than to smear Martin. [Orlando Sentinel]

3. On Fox News, Geraldo said that Martin was dressed “like a wannabe gangster.” Bill O’Reilly agreed with him. The sole evidence is that Martin was wearing a hoodie. Geraldo added that “everyone that ever stuck up a convenience store” was wearing a hoodie. [ThinkProgress; The Blaze]

4. Without any evidence, prominent right-wing bloggers suggested that Martin was a drug dealer. Right-wing blogger Dan Riehl advances the theory, also advanced in a widely linked peice on a site called Wagist. There does not appear to be any evidence to support this claim whatsoever. [Riehl World View]

5. Without any evidence, a right-wing columnist alleged that Martin assaulted a bus driver. Unlike Zimmerman, Trayvon has no documented history of violence. This allegation continues to be advanced by a blogger on the Examiner even after the real reason was leaked to the police and confirmed by the family. [Miami Herald; Examiner]

6. Zimmerman’s friend says Martin was to blame because he was disrespectful to Zimmerman. Zimmerman’s friend Joe Oliver said that Martin would not have been shot to death if Trayvon had just said “I’m staying with my parents.” Of course, Zimmerman was not a police officer, and Trayvon had no duty to tell him who he was or where he was going. [NBC News]

The final part of the effort to smear Trayvon Martin is to link him and his supporters to irresponsible fringe groups like the New Black Panthers and marignal provocateurs like Louis Farrakhan. Threats by these groups are serious and should be investigated, but they have nothing to do with Martin or his supporters. The leader of the effort to associate Martin with these groups is Matt Drudge. You can see how he is framing the story today here.

Ultimately, whether Martin was a perfect person is irrelevant to whether Zimmerman’s conduct that night was justified. Clearly, there are two different versions of the events that transpired on February 26, the night Trayvon was killed. There are conflicting statements by witnesses and conflicting evidence as to who was the aggressor. Zimmerman has the right to tell his side of the story. But his opportunity to do this will come in a court of law after he is charged and arrested. In the meantime, Zimmerman’s supporters should stop trying to smear the reputation of a dead, 17-year-old boy.

One month ago today, George Zimmerman shot and killed 17-year-old Trayvon Martin. But Zimmerman has not been arrested in the case because he says he shot in self-defense. Since then, Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” law — allowing use of deadly force if there is a “reasonable belief” it is necessary to “prevent death or great bodily harm” — has come under fire. The National Rifle Association lobbied heavily for the Florida law, which passed in 2005, and has continued to push for similar laws across the nation.

So far, 25 states have approved Florida-style “Stand Your Ground” measures, and the NRA is not backing down from its support for such laws even after Martin’s tragic death. This legislative session, legislators in another five states are considering turning the self-defense legislation into law in their own states:

ALASKA: After the state House approved the bill, the Alaska Senate is now debating the measure that would expand the right to use lethal force as a means of self-defense — just like the Florida law. An assistant district attorney spoke out against the bill during a hearing earlier this month, telling senators that it is a “bad idea.” “It will do nothing to enhance the safety of law-abiding gun owners,” said James Fayette. What it will do is make it more difficult for me and my colleagues to convict violent criminals.”

IOWA: The state House has approved a Florida-style bill that’s now pending in the Senate. Before the House passed the bill earlier this month, Democrats fled the Iowa Capitol ahead of the vote to protest Republicans bringing the bill up for a vote. It’s likely the legislation will be blocked on procedural grounds, but state Rep. Matt Windschitl (R) says he will reintroduce it.

MASSACHUSETTS: A legislator in Massachusetts introduced a self-defense bill that would allow people to use “guns, knives, baseball bats or other deadly force if they feel threatened or think someone else is endangered.” Sen. Stephen Brewer (D), who introduced the bill, said it’s a matter of allowing people to protect themselves, but another state Democrat, Sen. Stanley Rosenberg, said he fears it would become a “shoot first and ask questions later law.”

Lawmakers in New York and Nebraska have also introduced “Stand Your Ground” bills that are stalled in both legislatures.

Along with the NRA, the conservative American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) has pushed for these “Stand Your Ground” laws across the country. In response to ALEC’s role, a coalition is pressuring the organization’s corporate sponsors to stop funding ALEC’s “reckless agenda” that harm communities.