Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

The state of voting: Oct. 3, 2022

voting legislation updates

This weekly update summarizing legislative activity affecting voting and elections is powered by the Voting Rights Lab. Sign up for VRL’s weekly newsletter here.

The Voting Rights Lab is tracking 2,201 bills so far this session, with 580 bills that tighten voter access or election administration and 1,054 bills that expand the rules. The rest are neutral, mixed or unclear in their impact.

If it seems like Wisconsin courts are continuously pulled into lawsuits over election laws, it’s because they are. There’s yet another lawsuit in the Badger State, and this one seeks to prohibit voters from intentionally canceling their returned mail ballots before Election Day.

Elsewhere, California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed several bills last week, including new laws that will require the placement of drop boxes on state university campuses, protect election workers, improve bilingual poll worker recruitment, and improve voter list maintenance. The Michigan Legislature passed a bill that would allow election officials to start processing mail ballots prior to Election Day. A federal court blocked enforcement of a new Arizona law, finding that it violates the National Voter Registration Act and is likely unconstitutionally vague. A Pennsylvania court ruled that counties may allow voters to correct errors on their mail ballot envelopes. And, finally, in Montana, a trial court declared new voting restrictions unconstitutional, permanently enjoining their enforcement.

Here are the details:


California enacts four laws to improve voter access. Newsom signed four bills into law last Monday. Collectively, they will improve bilingual poll worker recruitment, place ballot drop boxes on state university campuses if school is in session during the election, protect election workers by enabling them to keep their identities and addresses confidential, and ensure voters are notified before their registrations are canceled, while improving the cancellation and restoration process for mentally incapacitated voters.

Michigan Legislature passes an election reform package, including a bill to allow clerks to start processing ballots before Election Day. On Wednesday, both chambers of the Legislature passed a package of four election bills by nearly unanimous votes. H.B. 4491 will allow clerks in jurisdictions with at least 10,000 residents to begin processing and verifying absentee ballots two days before Election Day. The bill also ensures that people who have died are removed from the voter registration list and clarifies rules about drop boxes. H.B. 6071 ensures polling places are not located in buildings owned by candidates and allows clerks to use central polling places that consolidate up to six precincts when it is convenient for voters. S.B. 311 and S.B. 8 allow active duty servicemembers to return ballots electronically beginning in 2024. Gov. Gretchen Whitmer is expected to sign the package in time for the mail voting and polling place provisions to take effect for November’s election.

Federal court blocks enforcement of Arizona voter registration cancellation provisions. Last week, a federal district court issued a preliminary injunction that blocks the enforcement of two provisions of S.B. 1260, which passed earlier this year. One blocked provision would have required election officials to cancel voter registration in a manner that the court found violates the National Voter Registration Act. The other would have created a new felony that plaintiffs contend is unconstitutionally vague. Attorney General Mark Brnovich has appealed the ruling on behalf of the state. This injunction comes on the heels of a stipulation signed last month, in which the Arizona secretary of state agreed not to enforce a different voter purge law being challenged, H.B. 2243, which would require election officials to cancel registrations of voters whom they “have reason to believe” are not citizens.

Pennsylvania court allows counties to give voters an opportunity to fix errors on their mail ballot envelopes. Early last month, several national and state Republican groups filed a petition in Pennsylvania’s Commonwealth Court (an intermediate appellate court) seeking to prevent county officials from notifying voters about minor errors on mail ballot return envelopes and giving them an opportunity to correct (or “cure”) the issue. The Pennsylvania Code neither explicitly authorizes or prohibits counties from providing these options. On Thursday, the court denied the petition, rejecting the petitioners’ argument that counties may not implement procedures unless they are explicitly authorized by the General Assembly.

Montana trial court declares new restrictions unconstitutional. A Montana trial court declared Friday that three laws passed in 2021 cannot be enforced because they violate provisions of the state’s Constitution. H.B. 176 would have eliminated Election Day registration. S.B. 169 would have limited the types of IDs voters could use for registration and identification at polling locations. The blocked portion of H.B. 530 would have prohibited individuals from helping voters return their mail ballots. The court issued this permanent injunction a little more than a week after the Montana Supreme Court affirmed the preliminary injunction in the case.

New Wisconsin lawsuits aim to prevent mail voters from spoiling their ballots and seek clarity on witness address requirements. Under current law, Wisconsin voters who return their absentee ballot, but then realize they made a mistake or changed their mind about how they wish to vote, may spoil their ballot before Election Day and return a new one. A new lawsuit seeks to end this practice, asserting that the Wisconsin Election Commission guidance describing it is illegal. The suit is brought by the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty, which has successfully sued to prohibit a number of voter access policies, including drop boxes and ballot return by family and friends.

Another lawsuit won by WILL prevents clerks from adding accurate witness address details to voters’ ballot certificates to enable the ballots to be counted. The same lawsuit also invalidated the definition of what constitutes a witness address. As a result, two new lawsuits seek clarity on what level of detail is required for a mail ballot to be counted. For example, whether a ballot should be counted or rejected if the municipality is included but the ZIP code is missing.

Read More

news app
New platforms help overcome biased news reporting
Tero Vesalainen/Getty Images

The Selective Sanctity of Death: When Empathy Depends on Skin Color

Rampant calls to avoid sharing the video of Charlie Kirk’s death have been swift and emphatic across social media. “We need to keep our souls clean,” journalists plead. “Where are social media’s content moderators?” “How did we get so desensitized?” The moral outrage is palpable; the demands for human dignity urgent and clear.

But as a Black woman who has been forced to witness the constant virality of Black death, I must ask: where was this widespread anger for George Floyd? For Philando Castile? For Daunte Wright? For Tyre Nichols?

Keep ReadingShow less
Following Jefferson: Promoting Inter-Generational Understanding Through Constitution-Making
Mount Rushmore
Photo by John Bakator on Unsplash

Following Jefferson: Promoting Inter-Generational Understanding Through Constitution-Making

No one can denounce the New York Yankee fan for boasting that her favorite ballclub has won more World Series championships than any other. At 27 titles, the Bronx Bombers claim more than twice their closest competitor.

No one can question admirers of the late, great Chick Corea, or the equally astonishing Alison Krauss, for their virtually unrivaled Grammy victories. At 27 gold statues, only Beyoncé and Quincy Jones have more in the popular categories.

Keep ReadingShow less
A close up of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement badge.

Trump’s mass deportations promise security but deliver economic pain, family separation, and chaos. Here’s why this policy is failing America.

Getty Images, Tennessee Witney

The Cruel Arithmetic of Trump’s Immigration Crackdown

As summer 2025 winds down, the Trump administration’s deportation machine is operating at full throttle—removing over one million people in six months and fulfilling a campaign promise to launch the “largest deportation operation in American history.” For supporters, this is a victory lap for law and order. For the rest of the lot, it’s a costly illusion—one that trades complexity for spectacle and security for chaos.

Let’s dispense with the fantasy first. The administration insists that mass deportations will save billions, reduce crime, and protect American jobs. But like most political magic tricks, the numbers vanish under scrutiny. The Economic Policy Institute warns that this policy could destroy millions of jobs—not just for immigrants but for U.S.-born workers in sectors like construction, elder care, and child care. That’s not just a fiscal cliff—it is fewer teachers, fewer caregivers, and fewer homes built. It is inflation with a human face. In fact, child care alone could shrink by over 15%, leaving working parents stranded and employers scrambling.

Meanwhile, the Peterson Institute projects a drop in GDP and employment, while the Penn Wharton School’s Budget Model estimates that deporting unauthorized workers over a decade would slash Social Security revenue and inflate deficits by nearly $900 billion. That’s not a typo. It’s a fiscal cliff dressed up as border security.

And then there’s food. Deporting farmworkers doesn’t just leave fields fallow—it drives up prices. Analysts predict a 10% spike in food costs, compounding inflation and squeezing families already living paycheck to paycheck. In California, where immigrant renters are disproportionately affected, eviction rates are climbing. The Urban Institute warns that deportations are deepening the housing crisis by gutting the construction workforce. So much for protecting American livelihoods.

But the real cost isn’t measured in dollars. It’s measured in broken families, empty classrooms, and quiet despair. The administration has deployed 10,000 armed service members to the border and ramped up “self-deportation” tactics—policies so harsh they force people to leave voluntarily. The result: Children skipping meals because their parents fear applying for food assistance; Cancer patients deported mid-treatment; and LGBTQ+ youth losing access to mental health care. The Human Rights Watch calls it a “crueler world for immigrants.” That’s putting it mildly.

This isn’t targeted enforcement. It’s a dragnet. Green card holders, long-term residents, and asylum seekers are swept up alongside undocumented workers. Viral videos show ICE raids at schools, hospitals, and churches. Lawsuits are piling up. And the chilling effect is real: immigrant communities are retreating from public life, afraid to report crimes or seek help. That’s not safety. That’s silence. Legal scholars warn that the administration’s tactics—raids at schools, churches, and hospitals—may violate Fourth Amendment protections and due process norms.

Even the administration’s security claims are shaky. Yes, border crossings are down—by about 60%, thanks to policies like “Remain in Mexico.” But deportation numbers haven’t met the promised scale. The Migration Policy Institute notes that monthly averages hover around 14,500, far below the millions touted. And the root causes of undocumented immigration—like visa overstays, which account for 60% of cases—remain untouched.

Crime reduction? Also murky. FBI data shows declines in some areas, but experts attribute this more to economic trends than immigration enforcement. In fact, fear in immigrant communities may be making things worse. When people won’t talk to the police, crimes go unreported. That’s not justice. That’s dysfunction.

Public opinion is catching up. In February, 59% of Americans supported mass deportations. By July, that number had cratered. Gallup reports a 25-point drop in favor of immigration cuts. The Pew Research Center finds that 75% of Democrats—and a growing number of independents—think the policy goes too far. Even Trump-friendly voices like Joe Rogan are balking, calling raids on “construction workers and gardeners” a betrayal of common sense.

On social media, the backlash is swift. Users on X (formerly Twitter) call the policy “ineffective,” “manipulative,” and “theater.” And they’re not wrong. This isn’t about solving immigration. It’s about staging a show—one where fear plays the villain and facts are the understudy.

The White House insists this is what voters wanted. But a narrow electoral win isn’t a blank check for policies that harm the economy and fray the social fabric. Alternatives exist: Targeted enforcement focused on violent offenders; visa reform to address overstays; and legal pathways to fill labor gaps. These aren’t radical ideas—they’re pragmatic ones. And they don’t require tearing families apart to work.

Trump’s deportation blitz is a mirage. It promises safety but delivers instability. It claims to protect jobs but undermines the very sectors that keep the country running. It speaks the language of law and order but acts with the recklessness of a demolition crew. Alternatives exist—and they work. Cities that focus on community policing and legal pathways report higher public safety and stronger economies. Reform doesn’t require cruelty. It requires courage.

Keep ReadingShow less
Multi-colored speech bubbles overlapping.

Stanford’s Strengthening Democracy Challenge shows a key way to reduce political violence: reveal that most Americans reject it.

Getty Images, MirageC

In the Aftermath of Assassinations, Let’s Show That Americans Overwhelmingly Disapprove of Political Violence

In the aftermath of Charlie Kirk’s assassination—and the assassination of Minnesota state legislator Melissa Hortman only three months ago—questions inevitably arise about how to reduce the likelihood of similar heinous actions.

Results from arguably the most important study focused on the U.S. context, the Strengthening Democracy Challenge run by Stanford University, point to one straightforward answer: show people that very few in the other party support political violence. This approach has been shown to reduce support for political violence.

Keep ReadingShow less