Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Fresh lawsuits challenge vote-by-mail limits in four Southern states

Mailed-in ballots
Bill Oxford/Getty Images

Updated Monday afternoon to describe four, not three, lawsuits.

Expanding voters' access to absentee ballots across the South during the coronavirus pandemic is the goal of the four newest lawsuits brought by Democrats and civil rights groups.

The suits, like a wave of others filed across the country during the public health emergency, attack as unconstitutional and against federal law the limited available reasons for voting at home in Alabama, North Carolina, South Carolina and Tennessee and the complex processes required to fill out and return those absentee ballots.

South Carolina and Tennessee now rank among the six states where it looks to be most difficult to both vote and remain healthy this year. Alabama would be on the list but for a recent relaxation of its absentee balloting excuse rules to allow people to cite their fear of Covid-19.


Other states where lawsuits have been filed by Democrats and voting rights groups to expand mail and absentee voting include Texas, Nevada, Missouri and Pennsylvania.

Here is a look at the latest lawsuits. The North Carolina case was brought Monday in state court, while the others were filed in federal court Friday:

South Carolina

This lawsuit was filed by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and the Democratic National Committee, which have been spearheading the party's multimillion-dollar campaign to remove obstacles to voting by filing more than two-dozen claims in 17 different states.

The latest argues that South Carolina's law constitutes a form of age discrimination prohibited by fedreal law because it exempts people 65 and older from having to provide the sort of excuse to vote absneteee required of younger people. The party filed a similar claim last month against Texas, which is on the list of seven states that only permit the elderly automatic access to an absentee ballot.

The suit also challenges the requirements that South Carolinians get someone else to witness their absentee ballot signatures and pay for postage to return their mail ballots — and the state law saying such ballots are valid only if received at election offices by Election Day.

Alabama

The Southern Poverty Law Center, the NAACP and a disabilities group have sued Gov. Kay Ivey and Secretary of State John Merrill, both Republicans, and local election officials in an attempt to ease some of the remaining limits on absentee voting.

Although the state normally requires a reason, or "excuse," to vote absentee, it has concluded that the illness excuse applies to anyone with fear of viral exposure during the primaries (postponed to July from March). Nine other states have made similar decisions.

The lawsuit seeks to overturn the requirements that an absentee ballot be signed by witnesses or a notary and that a copy of an ID be included with the ballot.

It also asks a judge to order the state to arrange for "curbside voting," the option of casting a ballot without leaving the car.

Tennessee

The claim was filed by the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law and the Campaign Legal Center on behalf of voters and five organizations including the NAACP.

It argues the state has among the most restrictive rules on who qualifies for an absentee ballot. It says that because of the coronavirus anyone should be able to get an absentee ballot in order to avoid risking exposure.

The suit also attacks as discriminatory the requirement in state law, similar to those in Texas and South Carolina, that only people older than 60 may obtain an absentee ballot without a specified excuse.

North Carolina

The newest case was brought in the name of the Right to Vote Foundation and the National Redistricting Foundation by Marc Elias, who is also directing the litigation campaign of the Democrats.

The suit seeks to block the state's unusual requirement that absentee ballots bear the signatures of either a notary or two witnesses. It also asks a state judge in Raleigh to order North Carolina to provide postage-paid envelopes and to count mailed ballots that arrive as late as Nov. 11 so long as they are postmarked by Election Day.

And it asks the court to bar election officials from rejecting ballots based on perceived discrepancies between the signature on file and the signature on the envelope -- without giving the voter a chance to fix the problem.

Elias is behind another suit, filed at the same courthouse in March, challenging a new state law that severely limits who may help voters fill out absentee ballot request forms and submit them.

Read More

An oversized ballot box surrounded by people.

Young people worldwide form new parties to reshape politics—yet America’s two-party system blocks them.

Getty Images, J Studios

No Country for Young Politicians—and How To Fix That

In democracies around the world, young people have started new political parties whenever the establishment has sidelined their views or excluded them from policymaking. These parties have sometimes reinvigorated political competition, compelled established parties to take previously neglected issues seriously, or encouraged incumbent leaders to find better ways to include and reach out to young voters.

In Europe, a trio in their twenties started Volt in 2017 as a pan-European response to Brexit, and the party has managed to win seats in the European Parliament and in some national legislatures. In Germany, young people concerned about climate change created Klimaliste, a party committed to limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius, as per the Paris Agreement. Although the party hasn’t won seats at the federal level, they have managed to win some municipal elections. In Chile, leaders of the 2011 student protests, who then won seats as independent candidates, created political parties like Revolución Democrática and Convergencia Social to institutionalize their movements. In 2022, one of these former student leaders, Gabriel Boric, became the president of Chile at 36 years old.

Keep ReadingShow less
How To Fix Gerrymandering: A Fair-Share Rule for Congressional Redistricting

Demonstrators gather outside of The United States Supreme Court during an oral arguments in Gill v. Whitford to call for an end to partisan gerrymandering on October 3, 2017 in Washington, DC

Getty Images, Olivier Douliery

How To Fix Gerrymandering: A Fair-Share Rule for Congressional Redistricting

The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield, and government to gain ground. ~ Thomas Jefferson, Letter to Col. Edward Carrington, Paris, 27 May 1788

The Problem We Face

The U.S. House of Representatives was designed as the chamber of Congress most directly tethered to the people. Article I of the Constitution mandates that seats be apportioned among the states according to population and that members face election every two years—design features meant to keep representatives responsive to shifting public sentiment. Unlike the Senate, which prioritizes state sovereignty and representation, the House translates raw population counts into political voice: each House district is to contain roughly the same number of residents, ensuring that every citizen’s vote carries comparable weight. In principle, then, the House serves as the nation’s demographic mirror, channeling the diverse preferences of the electorate into lawmaking and acting as a safeguard against unresponsive or oligarchic governance.

Nationally, the mismatch between the overall popular vote and the partisan split in House seats is small, with less than a 1% tilt. But state-level results tell a different story. Take Connecticut: Democrats hold all five seats despite Republicans winning over 40% of the statewide vote. In Oklahoma, the inverse occurs—Republicans control every seat even though Democrats consistently earn around 40% of the vote.

Keep ReadingShow less
Once Again, Politicians Are Choosing Their Voters. It’s Time for Voters To Choose Back.
A pile of political buttons sitting on top of a table

Once Again, Politicians Are Choosing Their Voters. It’s Time for Voters To Choose Back.

Once again, politicians are trying to choose their voters to guarantee their own victories before the first ballot is cast.

In the latest round of redistricting wars, Texas Republicans are attempting a rare mid-decade redistricting to boost their advantage ahead of the 2026 midterms, and Democratic governors in California and New York are signaling they’re ready to “fight fire with fire” with their own partisan gerrymanders.

Keep ReadingShow less
Stolen Land, Stolen Votes: Native Americans Defending the VRA Protects Us All – and We Should Support Them

Wilson Deschine sits at the "be my voice" voter registration stand at the Navajo Nation annual rodeo, in Window Rock.

Getty Images, David Howells

Stolen Land, Stolen Votes: Native Americans Defending the VRA Protects Us All – and We Should Support Them

On July 24, the Supreme Court temporarily blocked a Circuit Court order in a far-reaching case that could affect the voting rights of all Americans. Native American tribes and individuals filed the case as part of their centuries-old fight for rights in their own land.

The underlying subject of the case confronts racial gerrymandering against America’s first inhabitants, where North Dakota’s 2021 redistricting reduced Native Americans’ chances of electing up to three state representatives to just one. The specific issue that the Supreme Court may consider, if it accepts hearing the case, is whether individuals and associations can seek justice under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act (VRA). That is because the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, contradicting other courts, said that individuals do not have standing to bring Section 2 cases.

Keep ReadingShow less