Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Democrats win another voting victory in a swing state

Absentee ballots

Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson has revised the state's guidelines to local election officials on how to verify the signatures of voters on absentee ballots.

Kimberly White/Getty Ima

Chalk up another legal victory for Democrats trying to open up the voting process in time for this year's election.

The attorney behind the party's courthouse campaign in battleground states, Marc Elias, announced Tuesday that one of his lawsuits has prompted Michigan to revise its system for validating signatures on absentee ballots.

Democrats have already successfully sued for changes in the signature-checking procedures of Florida, Georgia and Iowa. Those three and Michigan are all swing states in the presidential campaign, and all of their combined 67 electoral votes were secured by Donald Trump in 2016 by fewer than 10 percentage points.


The fight over handwriting analysis on ballots mailed in or dropped off at government offices was once a secondary aspect of this year's voting rights debate. But it's gained significant attention now, since absentee balloting looks guaranteed to surge nationwide as a consequence of the coronavirus pandemic.

In Michigan, which Trump won by fewer than 11,000 votes out of more than 5 million tallied, absentee ballots could be rejected whenever election officials determined the signatures on the papers did not match the examples they had on file.

The lawsuit argued that leeway violated federal law and the Constitution because there was not any uniform standards or procedures for reviewing the signatures and the people doing the work lacked appropriate training. Also, the law does not require election officials to notify voters when their absentee ballots or applications were rejected, nor is there a process to fix the situation even if it is discovered in time.

Now, Democratic Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson has announced revisions in state policy governing mail ballots. The changes are not exactly what was requested in the lawsuit, but they're close enough that Democrats are declaring victory.

Benson's guidance instructs local clerks to do three things: Inform voters immediately if a signature is missing or doesn't match what is on file; presume signatures are valid unless they differ in "multiple, significant and obvious respects" from what is on file; and use a new training resource on how to perform signature verification.


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