Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Michigan​ redistricting commission gets appeals court's green light

Michigan district map

Michigan's 14th congressional district was designed to pack Democratic voters from Pontiac and Detroit into one convoluted district.

mapchart.net

In a huge win for the opponents of partisan gerrymandering, a federal appeals court has quashed a well-funded legal challenge from the right to Michigan's new independent redistricting commission.

The requirements for sitting on the panel, designed to limit the number of even potentially partisan players, were upheld as constitutional Wednesday by a unanimous 6th Circuit Court of Appeals. Republicans maintain the criteria violate free speech and equal protection rights of would-be public servants.

Unless the Supreme Court decides to step in, which for the moment looks unlikely, the panel will be created in time to draw new congressional and legislative seats after the 2020 census. Michigan will be the second-biggest, after California, of the 13 states where at least some mapmaking will be done by such a nonpartisan commission.


Michigan has been at the heart of the partisan gerrymandering battle for the past decade, because it has been a case study of what critics describe as politicians picking their voters when it should be the other way around: A battleground state where the maps drawn by a Republican Legislature kept that party in control of the state capital and the congressional delegation even after a series of elections in which Democrats won almost as many overall votes or even more.

Two years ago, 61 percent of voters approved a ballot measure to establish a commission to take over the line-drawing: four Republicans, four Democrats and five independents.

But the state GOP and other party activists challenged the eligibility criteria included in the referendum, which bars membership by current and former partisan elected officials, party bosses, candidates and lobbyists — or any members of their families. That violates both the First and 14th amendment rights of thousands of would-be commissioners, the Republicans said in a lawsuit spurned by a federal trial judge last November.

"The eligibility criteria do not represent some out-of-place addition to an unrelated state program; they are part and parcel of the definition of this commission, of how it achieves independence from partisan meddling," Judge Karen Nelson Moore wrote in an opinion, joined by Judge Ronald Lee Gilman. Both were nominated by President Bill Clinton.

Judge Chad Readler, a nominee of President Trump, concurred in the result and wrote: "It is refreshing to see the court embrace as a central principle a state's prerogative in organizing its government, including its election system."

Voters Not Politicians, the group created to push the ballot measure, said it will continue to encourage applications for seats on the commission. More than 4,300 have applied already. The deadline is June 1, after which the panelists are to be chosen at random by the secretary of state's office.

"Taking partisanship out of drawing electoral maps is critical to advancing the principle of accountability in government," said Paul Smith of the Campaign Legal Center, which represented that grassroots group in the lawsuit. "Michigan voters want fair maps. They will not be silenced by special interests, who continue to try and exert their will over the redistricting process."

Spokeswoman Tony Zammit said the Michigan GOP has not decided whether to appeal.


Read More

Voters lining up to vote.

Voters line up at the Oak Lawn Branch Library voting center on Primary Election Day in Dallas on March 3, 2026. Republicans' decision to hold a split primary from the Democrats and to eliminate countywide voting forced Dallas County voters to cast ballots at assigned neighborhood precincts, leading to confusion. Republicans have now decided to use countywide polling locations for the May 26 runoff election.

Shelby Tauber for The Texas Tribune

Dallas County GOP Will Agree To Use Countywide Voting Sites for May 26 Runoff Election

Dallas County Republicans will agree to allow voters to cast ballots at countywide voting sites for the May 26 runoff election after a switch to precinct-based voting sites caused chaos, the county party chair said Tuesday.

Dallas County Republican Chairman Allen West supported the use of precinct-based sites earlier this month, but said using precincts again for the runoff would expose the county party to “increased risk and voter confusion” because the county is planning to use countywide sites for upcoming municipal elections and early voting.

Keep ReadingShow less
A person signing a piece of paper with other people around them.

Javon Jackson, center, was able to register to vote following passage of a 2019 Nevada law that restored voting rights to formerly incarcerated individuals.

The Nation Is Missing Millions of Voters Due to Lack of Rights for Former Felons

If you gathered every American with a prison record into one contiguous territory and admitted it to the union, you would create the 12th-largest state. It would be home to at least 7 million to 8 million people and hold a dozen votes in the Electoral College.

In a close presidential race, this hypothetical state of the formerly incarcerated could decide who wins the White House.

Keep ReadingShow less
With the focus on the voting posters, the people in the background of the photo sign up to vote.

An analysis of Trump’s SAVE Act strategy, the voter ID debate, and how Pew data is being misused—exploring election integrity, voter suppression, and the political fight shaping U.S. democracy.

Getty Images, SDI Productions

Stop Fighting Voter ID. Start Defining It.

President Trump doesn't need the SAVE America Act to pass. He only needs the debate to continue. Every minute spent arguing about voter suppression repeats the underlying premise — that noncitizen voting is a real and widespread problem — until it feels like an established fact. The question is whether Democrats will contest Republicans’ definition before the frame hardens.

Trump's claim that 88% of Americans support the bill traces to a Pew Research Center survey — a survey that found 83% support a “government-issued photo ID to vote,” not extreme vetting for proof of citizenship. That support included 95% of Republicans and 71% of Democrats, indicating genuine, broad, bipartisan support for a basic civic principle. That's worth taking seriously.

Keep ReadingShow less
People standing at voting booths.

The proposed SAVE Act and MEGA Act would require proof of citizenship to register to vote, risking the disenfranchisement of millions of eligible Americans.

Getty Images, EvgeniyShkolenko

The SAVE Act is a Solution in Search of A Problem

The federal government seems to be barreling toward a federal election power grab. Trump's State of the Union address called for the Senate to push through the SAVE Act, which has already passed the House, in the name of so-called "election integrity." And the SAVE Act isn’t the only such bill. Like the SAVE Act, the Make Elections Great Again (MEGA) Act—introduced in the House—would require voters to provide a document outlined in the Act that allegedly proves their U.S. citizenship. We’ve been down this road before in Texas, and spoiler alert: it was unworkable.

Both the SAVE and MEGA Acts would disenfranchise millions of eligible U.S. citizens without making our federal elections more secure. They seek to roll out a faulty federal voter registration system, despite the existing separate registration and voting process for state and local elections. And these Acts target a minuscule “problem”—but would unleash mass voter purges and confusion.

Keep ReadingShow less