Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Ohio Democrats sue for more election drop boxes

Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose

Ohio Democrats are suing GOP Secretary of State Frank LaRose in an attempt to lift his limit of one ballot drop box per county.

Justin Merriman/Getty Images

The Ohio Democratic Party has filed a lawsuit against Secretary of State Frank LaRose challenging his limit of one secure ballot drop box per county.

The suit, filed Tuesday in state court, comes as Ohio — and the rest of the nation — braces for an expected surge in absentee voting this fall as voters seek to avoid Covid-19 exposure.

While election officials and voting rights advocates have been heavily focused on expanding mail-in balloting, growing concerns about the performance of the Postal Service during the primary election season have prompted people to begin looking for additional ways to submit their ballots.


The suit claims there is nothing in state law that limits the number of drop boxes. Republican officials believe otherwise.

"Expanding the availability of secure voter drop boxes within Ohio counties would make an enormous difference for safe, secure and easy voting in Ohio, as well as eliminate delays in boards receiving ballots through the mail system," Ohio Democratic Party Chairman David Pepper said.

LaRose, a Republican, did not have an immediate reaction to the lawsuit.

Many states — run by both Republicans and Democrats — use drop boxes to collect paper ballots.

The Election Assistance Commission recommends that there be one dropbox for every 15,000 to 20,000 registered voters. Twenty counties in Ohio have more than 100,000 registered voters and in the March primary 1.8 million ballots were cast by mail.

Ohioans can request absentee ballots until Oct. 31, and ballots will be mailed to those who request them starting Oct. 6.

Read More

Why Doing Immigration the “White Way” Is Wrong

A close up of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement badge.

Getty Images, Tennessee Witney

Why Doing Immigration the “White Way” Is Wrong

The president is granting refugee status to white South Africans. Meanwhile, he is issuing travel bans, unsure about his duty to uphold due process, fighting birthright citizenship, and backing massive human rights breaches against people of color, including deporting citizens and people authorized to be here.

The administration’s escalating immigration enforcement—marked by “fast-track” deportations or disappearances without due process—signal a dangerous leveling-up of aggressive anti-immigration policies and authoritarian tactics. In the face of the immigration chaos that we are now in, we could—and should—turn our efforts toward making immigration policies less racist, more efficient, and more humane because America’s promise is built on freedom and democracy, not terror. As social scientists, we know that in America, thinking people can and should “just get documented” ignores the very real and large barriers embedded in our systems.

Keep ReadingShow less
Insider trading in Washington, DC

U.S. senators and representatives with access to non-public information are permitted to buy and sell individual stocks. It’s not just unethical; it sends the message that the game is rigged.

Getty Images, Greggory DiSalvo

Insider Trading: If CEOs Can’t Do It, Why Can Congress?

Ivan Boesky. Martha Stewart. Jeffrey Skilling.

Each became infamous for using privileged, non-public information to profit unfairly from the stock market. They were prosecuted. They served time. Because insider trading is a crime that threatens public trust and distorts free markets.

Keep ReadingShow less
Supreme Court Changes the Game on Federal Environmental Reviews

A pump jack seen in a southeast New Mexico oilfield.

Getty Images, Daniel A. Leifheit

Supreme Court Changes the Game on Federal Environmental Reviews

Getting federal approval for permits to build bridges, wind farms, highways and other major infrastructure projects has long been a complicated and time-consuming process. Despite growing calls from both parties for Congress and federal agencies to reform that process, there had been few significant revisions – until now.

In one fell swoop, the U.S. Supreme Court has changed a big part of the game.

Keep ReadingShow less