Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

SPLC pledges $100 million for voter engagement in the South

Georgia voting stickers
Megan Varner/Getty Images

The Southern Poverty Law Center announced Monday a $100 million, decadelong investment in voter outreach across five Southern states.

The civil rights organization, which has been criticized in recent years for an anti-conservative bias, will be partnering with other groups through its year-old Vote Your Voice initiative.

While all five of the targeted states — Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana and Mississippi — had increased voter turnout in 2020 compared to 2016, three of them ranked among the dozen with the lowest participation rate last year. Only Florida (15th) and Georgia (25th) ranked higher than 40th.


Each of the states underperformed the national average for turnout, although Georgia and Mississippi were just slightly below. Only Mississippi exceeded the national average for turnout among Black voters, while Florida was more than 10 points below.

According to the liberal-leaning Brennan Center for Justice, since the 2020 election 19 states have enacted a total of 33 laws that make it harder for people to vote. Georgia has been cited nationally as one of the states to impose the most restrictive changes, after the state went for a Democratic presidential candidate for the first time since 1992. The Republican-controlled Legislature has since taken a number of steps to tighten voting rules.

Florida has also been cited by voting rights advocates for its own sweeping changes to voting laws.

“[To] ensure a government exists that truly is by the people and for the people, we must expand our efforts to push against the anti-democratic statements and actions of many state and local officials in the Deep South,” said SPLC President and CEO Margaret Huang. “We are thankful for the hard work of all of our grant partners; these organizations’ successes help to empower voters whose rights have been violated for too long.”

Alabama Secretary of State John Merrill, who oversees elections, told WSFA12 News that he is concerned SPLC’s investment is biased against conservatives.

“It is a targeted effort to ensure that liberal special interest groups that have been targeted by the SPLC are identified and motivated to go to the polls,” he said.

Grants awarded through Vote Your Voice will support civic engagement programming, increasing fundraising opportunities, training new political leaders, building engagement in advance of the 2030 round of redistricting, and developing new tactics and tools.

Another Southern state was in the news Monday, when the Justice Department announced it had filed a lawsuit against Texas for racial discrimination in the redistricting process.

While a number of states that had been subject to a Voting Rights Act provision that required them to get prior approval from the federal government before making election-related changes, that “preclearance” section has been struck down by the Supreme Court. But the DOJ retains the power to enforce other elements of the act.

“Our complaint today alleges that the redistricting plans approved by the Texas state Legislature and signed into law by the governor will deny Black and Latino voters an equal opportunity to participate in the voting process and to elect representatives of their choice, in violation of the Voting Rights Act,” Associate Attorney General Vanita Gupta said at press conference. “Our complaint also alleges that several of those districts were drawn with discriminatory intent.”

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton’s office called the suit “absurd.”

The Justice Department alleges that Legislature intentionally drew state and federal district lines to minimize the votes of minorities, even though increases in the Black and Latino populations drove the changes.

“For example, Texas will gain two new congressional seats because of its population growth, almost all of which is due to growth in the state’s minority population. However, Texas has designed both of those new seats to have white voting majorities,” said Gupta. “The congressional plan also deliberately reconfigured a West Texas district to eliminate the opportunity for Latino voters to elect a representative of their choice. This is the third time in three decades where Texas has eliminated a Latino electoral opportunity in this same district, despite previous court determinations that this violates the law.”

While the Supreme Court has determined states should be the arbiters of partisan gerrymandering, the federal government may still intervene when racial gerrymandering is discovered.

And in North Carolina, the courts have become involved in a fight over new maps, with four cases working through the system.


Read More

Who’s Responsible When AI Causes Harm?: Unpacking the Federal AI Liability Framework Debate
the letters are made up of different colors

Who’s Responsible When AI Causes Harm?: Unpacking the Federal AI Liability Framework Debate

This nonpartisan policy brief, written by an ACE fellow, is republished by The Fulcrum as part of our partnership with the Alliance for Civic Engagement and our NextGen initiative — elevating student voices, strengthening civic education, and helping readers better understand democracy and public policy.

Key takeaways

  • The U.S. has no national AI liability law. Instead, a patchwork of state laws has emerged which has resulted in legal protections being dependent on where an individual resides.
  • It’s often unclear who is legally responsible when AI causes harm. This gap leaves many people with no clear path to seek help.
  • In March 2026, the White House and Congress introduced major proposals to establish a federal standard, but there is significant disagreement about whether that standard should prioritize protecting innovation or protecting people harmed by AI systems.

Background: A Patchwork of State Laws

Without a national AI law, states have been filling in the gaps on their own. The result is an uneven landscape where a person’s legal protections depend entirely on which state they live in.

Keep ReadingShow less
Stethoscope, pile of hundred dollar bills and a calculator

A deep dive into America’s healthcare cost crisis, comparing reform to a modern “moonshot.” Explores payment models, rising costs, and lessons from John F. Kennedy’s space race vision to drive systemic change.

IronHeart/Getty Images

The Moonshot America Needs to Solve Its Healthcare Crisis

In 1961, President John F. Kennedy told the nation, “We choose to go to the moon.” It’s often remembered as a moment of national ambition. In reality, the United States was locked in a Cold War with the Soviet Union, and the fear of falling behind in technological dominance made the mission unavoidable.

Today’s space race is driven by a different force. Governments and private companies are investing billions to capture economic advantages, from satellite infrastructure to advanced computing to the next frontier of resource extraction.

Keep ReadingShow less
After the Court's Voting Rights Decision - How to Protect Black-Majority Districts
a large white building with columns with United States Supreme Court Building in the background

After the Court's Voting Rights Decision - How to Protect Black-Majority Districts

The Supreme Court recently ruled that Louisiana violated the Constitution in creating a new Black-majority voting district. This was after a Federal court had ruled that the previous map, by packing Blacks all in one district, diluted their votes, which violated the Voting Rights Act.

The question is what impact the decision in Louisiana v Callais will have on §2 of the Voting Rights Act ... and on the current gerrymander contest to gain safe seats in the House. The conservative majority said that the decision left the Act intact. The liberal minority, in a strong dissent by Justice Kagan, said that the practical impact was to "render §2 all but a dead letter," making it likely that existing Black-majority districts will not remain for long.

Keep ReadingShow less