Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

The state of voting: June 27, 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 2,176 bills so far this session, with 579 bills that tighten the rules governing voter access or election administration and 1,035 bills that expand the rules.

In the final days of the legislative session, Arizona lawmakers passed a bill that would revive previously vetoed approaches to voter purges and another to ensure voters can track the status of their mail ballots online. Louisiana enacted legislation prohibiting stand-alone drop boxes as well as bills to provide voter registration opportunities in high schools and codifying an absentee ballot cure process.

Meanwhile, New Hampshire’s legislature sent the governor a bill that imposes harsh criminal penalties for election administrators. Delaware appears to be on the verge of enacting same-day registration. And the Safeguard Fair Elections Act, legislation that would provide a number of protections against election threats and intimidation, was introduced into the North Carolina Senate.

Looking ahead: Missouri Gov. Mike Parson is likely to sign a bill creating in-person early voting and strengthening voter ID requirements on Wednesday.

Here are the details:


Arizona lawmakers pass flurry of bills as session ends. The Arizona Legislature spent several long days finishing up its work for the 2022 session last week. In addition to passing the state’s budget, the Legislature passed several election-related measures to cue them up for either the governor’s signature or their presentation to Arizona voters in the fall. Lawmakers added an amendment related to voter registration purgesto H.B. 2243 before it passed, very similar to that which Gov. Doug Ducey vetoed earlier this session. They also passed a bill ensuring voters can track the status of their mail ballots online. If the governor signs it, voters will be able to see when their ballots are received, verified and counted.

Missouri’s governor plans to sign legislation that would create in-person early voting, while also tightening the state’s voter ID law. This week, Parson plans to sign H.B. 1878, legislation that would create early voting for the first time in Missouri – but would also make the voter ID law in the state more strict. The bill would create two weeks of early voting via in-person absentee voting. It would also make the state’s ID law more restrictive by eliminating many of the ID types that Missouri voters are currently allowed to show. In Missouri, the governor has 45 days after a bill is passed and the General Assembly adjourns to sign or veto that bill.

Louisiana facilitates student voter registration and codifies a cure process, while restricting absentee ballot return. Gov. John Bel Edwards signed a bill that requires all public and charter high schools in the state to provide eligible 17-year-old seniors with an opportunity to register to vote on school computers or paper applications. Louisiana also codified an absentee ballot cure process. While the state already had regulations establishing a notice and cure process, the newly enacted legislation would bar future secretaries of state from eliminating the system.

Louisiana also enacted legislation that would limit the in-person return of absentee ballots to registrars’ offices and early voting sites, prohibiting stand-alone drop boxes. In 2020, the New Orleans City Council won a legal fight allowing local officials to establish alternative, staffed, ballot drop-off sites, which are prohibited under the new legislation.

The Delaware Senate passes legislation that will establish same-day registration on Election Day. H.B. 25, a carryover bill from last session, would establish Election Day registration by moving the registration deadline from the Saturday before Election Day to the close of polls on Election Day. The bill has been sent to Gov. Jay Carney’s desk.

New Hampshire sends legislation to the governor targeting election administrators. The New Hampshire legislature passed H.B. 1567, which would direct the attorney general to investigate allegations against local election officials, make election official misconduct the only misdemeanor for which a conviction results in disenfranchisement, and establish civil penalties of up to $1,000 for unintentional misconduct by election officials. If passed, this legislation could interfere with the retention of election officials and make it more difficult to administer elections. The bill is now eligible for the governor’s signature.

The Safeguard Fair Elections Act is introduced in North Carolina. A new bill introduced in North Carolina last week ( S.B. 916) would establish criminal penalties for intimidation, threats or coercion of voters and election officials. The bill would also safeguard election totals by establishing penalties for public officials who refused to certify election results, require political party observers to complete training designed by the State Board of Elections, and establish funding for the board to monitor and track threats to voters and election officials.

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