Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Federal judge weighs in for easier mail voting in Texas

Absentee voting

More Texas voters, like these in San Antonio on Super Tuesday, would be able to avoid lines at polling places and vote by absentee ballots under a federal judge's ruling on Tuesday.

Edward Ornelas/ Getty Images

Everyone in Texas has a constitutional right to vote absentee because of the coronavirus pandemic, a federal judge has ruled.

The decision by Judge Fred Biery is the latest volley in what looks to be a protracted legal battle, in both state and federal courts, over who may avoid the possibility of viral infection at a Texas polling place this year. The fight is especially important because Texas is the second most populous state, a hotbed of hot contests this fall — and also among just a handful of states that have not relaxed stringent eligibility rules for voting by mail.

The ruling was among three fresh developments Tuesday in courthouses across the country, which have become the venue for dozens of fights between voting rights groups and conservative state governments over the rules for remote voting during a public health emergency. These are the details:


Texas

The decision by Biery, which begins with the opening words of the Declaration of Independence, provides a preliminary injunction while the pandemic is ongoing — allowing anyone trying to avoid the virus to obtain an absentee ballot for the July primary runoffs and the November election. Texas is one of 16 states with laws on the books requiring a specific excuse for people to absentee ballot, but a dozen of them have implemented workarounds this spring .

In Texas, one of the available excuses is a disability. The judge said that should apply to all registered voters who "lack immunity from Covid-19 and fear infection at polling places," which is similar to the view several state governments have taken.

A state court judge ruled similarly in a separate lawsuit last month, declaring the pandemic must allow voters to qualify for absentee ballots under the disability excuse. Republican Attorney General Ken Paxton appealed and threatened to prosecute election officials in the state's big cities who were starting to issue mail ballots without the usual excuses. And last week the state Supreme Court agreed to put a hold on expanded absentee voting until it considered the state's appeal

In another sweeping determination, Biery said another permissible excuse - being older than 65 - amounts to unconstitutional age discrimination against younger voters. Lawsuits pressing the same arguments are pending in several states where the elderly may always vote absentee but others may not.

One expert, Rick Hasen, a law professor at the University of California, Irvine, predicted the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals would overturn the ruling because its legal rationale was shaky.

Louisiana

The Southern Poverty Law Center and the Fair Elections Center, suing the state on behalf of the League of Women Voters, asked a federal judge to declare unconstitutional the requirement that people have a specified excuse before using an absentee ballot in either the July presidential primary or local elections in august..

It also argues the requirement that a witness' signature be on an absentee ballot is unconstitutional, as are current rules that don't permit voters to fix any problems with their absentee ballots, such as failing to sign or date them properly.

The suit says the effect of all the rules is to discriminate against old and minority voters. Suits are working their way through the courts challenging similar absentee ballot regulations in several other states.

Minnesota

Another challenge to witness signature requirements on absentee ballots was filed by the League of Women Voters in federal court in St. Paul. The coronavirus pandemic means that people will be unconstitutionally forced to risk their health in order to get someone to come close enough to countersign their envelopes ahead of the statewide primaries Aug. 11, the lawsuit argues.

Michelle Witte, executive director of the league, said the requirement hits seniors and minority voters particularly hard. "The current law requiring an absentee ballot witness unnecessarily exposes them to greater risk of contracting this deadly virus," she said.


Read More

Typing on a computer
person using laptop

America Needs a Digital Equity Policy, Not Just Tech Innovation

The United States invests billions in artificial intelligence research and development‚ semiconductor fabrication‚ and next-generation connectivity. Yet millions of Americans cannot consistently access the internet or afford the devices needed to submit an online application for social services or a job application․ This is not an oversight․ It is a policy choice that is costing the country dearly․

Connectivity is a floor, not a ceiling:

Keep ReadingShow less
The election voting process, bidding, hands raised up with papers

Confidence in U.S. elections has fallen to 55% ahead of the 2026 midterms. The real risk isn't who wins — it's whether the loser accepts it.

Svetlana Shamshurina/Getty Images

The Real Test of the 2026 Midterms Comes After the Vote

Less than three months before Americans vote in the 2026 midterms, a federal judge on August 11 blocked the U.S. Postal Service from implementing part of President Donald Trump’s executive order tightening mail-in voting rules. The ruling came amid an intensifying fight over how November’s elections will be administered. That fight underscores a deeper problem: the real question in American politics is no longer simply who wins the next election, but whether large numbers of people will still accept the result when their side loses.

Elections in the United States were supposed to settle arguments. One side wins, the other accepts defeat, and the country moves on. That quiet agreement is under growing pressure as the midterms approach. Control of Congress still matters, but beneath that contest lies a more consequential question: if the outcome goes against one of the two major political camps, will that camp still trust the process that declared it the loser?

Keep ReadingShow less
 Unrecognizable doctor prescribing pharmacy to patient.

After a 30-year decline, U.S. abortions are rising again. Texas data suggests bans may shift where abortions happen — not whether they do.

Natalia Gdovskaia/Getty Images

Pro-Life and Pro-Choice: Bridging the Gap

Introduction

We have spent decades arguing about abortion policy on ideological grounds. I think we now have an opportunity to step back, look at what actually happened, and ask a more fundamental question: What policies actually reduce the number of abortions?

I believe that is a question on which pro-life and pro-choice people should be able to agree. Whatever our differences about abortion itself, surely, we can agree that fewer abortions would be a good outcome.

Keep ReadingShow less
U.S. Capitol.

A rundown of the House bills most likely to become law this week — from seafood fraud enforcement to a sanctions bill critics call a tariff bill.

Photo by Andy Feliciotti on Unsplash

Both Chambers in Session this Week

Last Minute Rush

We’re not going to describe every bill the House aims to take action on this week because there’s lots. Instead, we’re going to focus on the ones that will become law if passed by the House and pull a few notable bills at the beginning of the legislative process. We’ll use the same level of discretion at the end of this week when we review what actually happened between today, Monday Sept. 14 and Friday, Sept. 18.

Probable New Laws

In addition to the bills listed below are also a couple of park renamings. All of these will, if passed, then go to the President for signing and once that’s done, become law.

Keep ReadingShow less