Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

The state of voting: June 21, 2022

State of voting - election law changes

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 2,166 bills so far this session, with 577 bills that tighten the rules governing voter access or election administration and 1,028 bills that expand the rules.

In New York, Gov. Kathy Hochul signed the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Act, landmark legislation designed to prevent race- and language-based discriminatory election laws and procedures. But in nearby New Hampshire, Gov. Chris Sununu signed a bill that creates a stricter voter ID law and establishes a new system of provisional ballots.

Meanwhile, a New Mexico county narrowly avoided an election crisis after a county commission initially refused to certify 2022 primary results, citing distrust of voting machines. And an Arizona court upheld the applicability of the latest version of the Election Procedures manual to give clarity to voters and election officials for the state's upcoming elections.

Here are the details:


New York enacts its John R. Lewis Voting Rights Act. On Monday June 20, Governor Hochul signed the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Act of New York into law. It creates legal protections to prevent race- and language-based discriminatory election laws, rules and practices. In certain instances, it will require that changes to election rules be pre-approved – or precleared – before going into effect, to ensure they will not have a discriminatory impact. The bill also creates private rights of action to facilitate injunctive relief when a law is discriminatory, as well as require all key voting materials to be provided in various languages.

Sununu signs New Hampshire’s strict voter ID bill. Previously, New Hampshire law allowed voters without physical ID to cast a regular ballot if they completed an affidavit affirming their identity, under penalty of perjury. S.B. 418, which was signed into law last week, eliminates that alternative, and instead rescinds their vote from the count if they are unable to show an ID within 10 days of the election. Most states with voter ID laws offer an alternative to ensure the identity of voters without ID can be verified through other means. This new bill puts New Hampshire in the minority.

Arizona judge affirms that the 2019 Election Procedures Manual will apply in 2022. On Friday, a trial court judge ruled against a lawsuit filed by Attorney General Mark Brnovich attempting to either rewrite the 2019 version of the EPM, which governs many aspects of Arizona elections including drop box security and signature verification, or to have it ruled inapplicable to elections in 2022. Brnovich brought the suit against Secretary of State Katie Hobbs several months after the two were unable to agree on the 2021 version of the EPM Hobbs proposed in the fall of last year. The court cited Brnovich’s delay in filing the suit and the approaching primary elections (Arizona’s state primary is on Aug. 2) among the considerations in ruling against the attorney general.

New Mexico narrowly avoids an election crisis. Otero County chose to certify its election results on the state deadline after initially refusing to do so out of distrust for the Dominion voting equipment used to tabulate the ballots. After the New Mexico Supreme Court ordered the county to certify and Secretary of State Maggie Toulouse Oliver asked the attorney general to launch a criminal investigation into the commission, the commission voted 2-1 to certify. County Commissioner Couy Griffin, who is also awaiting sentencing for his Jan. 6, 2021, trespassing conviction, voted against certification. Although all 33 counties voted to certify their results, activists berated officials in some counties, seeking to block certification.


Read More

Paul Ehrlich was wrong about everything

Crowd of people walking on a street.

Andy Andrews//Getty Images

Paul Ehrlich was wrong about everything

Biologist and author Paul Ehrlich, the most influential Chicken Little of the last century, died at the age of 93 this week. His 1968 book, “The Population Bomb,” launched decades of institutional panic in government, entertainment and journalism.

Ehrlich’s core neo-Malthusian argument was that overpopulation would exhaust the supply of food and natural resources, leading to a cascade of catastrophes around the world. “The Population Bomb” opens with a bold prediction, “The battle to feed all of humanity is over. In the 1970s and 1980s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now.”

Keep ReadingShow less
Bravado Isn’t a Strategy: Why the Iran War Has No Endgame

People clear rubble in a house in the Beryanak District after it was damaged by missile attacks two days before, on March 15, 2026 in Tehran, Iran. The United States and Israel continued their joint attack on Iran that began on February 28. Iran retaliated by firing waves of missiles and drones at Israel, and targeting U.S. allies in the region.

Getty Images, Majid Saeedi

Bravado Isn’t a Strategy: Why the Iran War Has No Endgame

Most of what we have heard from the administration as it pertains to the Iran War is swagger and bro-talk. A few days into the war, the White House released a social media video that combined footage of the bombardment with clips from video games. Not long after, it released a second video, titled “Justice the American Way,” that mixed images of the U.S. military with scenes from movies like Gladiator and Top Gun Maverick.

Speaking to reporters at the Pentagon, War Secretary Pete Hegseth boasted of “death and destruction from the sky all day long.” “They are toast, and they know it,” he said. “This was never meant to be a fair fight... we are punching them while they’re down.”

Keep ReadingShow less
A student in uniform walking through a campus.

A Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC) cadet walks through campus November 7, 2003 in Princeton, New Jersey.

Getty Images, Spencer Platt

Hegseth is Dumbing Down the Military (on Purpose)

One day before the United States began an ill-defined and illegal war of indefinite length with Iran, Pete Hegseth angrily attacked a different enemy: the Ivy League. The Secretary of War denounced Ivy League universities as "woke breeding grounds of toxic indoctrination” and then eliminated long-standing college fellowship programs with more than a dozen elite colleges, which had historically served as a pipeline for service members to the upper ranks of military leadership. Of the schools now on Hegseth’s "no-fly list," four sit in the top ten of the World’s Top Universities for 2026. So, why does the Secretary of War not want his armed forces to have the best education available? Because he wants a military without a brain.

For a guy obsessed with being the strongest and most lethal force in the world, cutting access to world-class schools is a bizarre gambit. It does reveal Hegseth doesn’t consider intelligence a factor–let alone an asset–in strength or lethality. That tracks. Hegseth alleges the Ivies infect officers with “globalist and radical ideologies that do not improve our fighting ranks…” God forbid the tip of the sword of our foreign policy has knowledge of international cooperation and global interconnectedness. The Ivy League has its own issues, but the Pentagon’s claim that they "fail to deliver rigorous education grounded in realism” is almost laughable. I’m a veteran Lieutenant Commander with two Ivy League degrees, both paid for with military tuition assistance, and I promise: it was rigorous. Meanwhile, are Hegseth’s performative politics grounded in reality? Attacking Harvard on social media the eve of initiating a new war with a foreign adversary is disgraceful, and even delusional.

Keep ReadingShow less
Are We Prepared for a World Where AI Isn’t at Work?
Person working at a desk with a laptop and books.

Are We Prepared for a World Where AI Isn’t at Work?

Draft an important email without using AI. Write it from scratch — no suggestions, no autocomplete, and no prompt to ChatGPT to compose or revise the email.

Now ask yourself: Did it feel slower? Harder? Slightly uncomfortable?

Keep ReadingShow less