Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Can he do that? Ga. governor, voting rights villain, cancels election.

Brian Kemp

Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp called off a state Supreme Court election and plans to appoint a new justice to the bench.

Kevin C. Cox/Getty Images

It's a startlingly bold move, the legality of which is now being challenged in court: Republican Gov. Brian Kemp, already an enemy of voting rights groups nationwide, has canceled an election and says he'll fill a seat on the Georgia Supreme Court all by himself.

After he won an extremely narrow election in 2018, Kemp's critics said it was entirely because, as secretary of state at the time, he used his power to suppress the vote for Democrat Stacey Abrams by aggressively purging the registration rolls, closing or moving polling stations, rebuffing voters with missing middle initials on their ID cards, and tossing absentee ballots for similarly small bureaucratic mistakes.

Now, the governor has opened himself up to intense criticism that he'd rather stack the state's highest court with another fellow conservative than abide by the spirit (if not the letter) of the law.


When justices leave in the middle of a term, Georgia law permits the governor to fill the vacancy. In this case, however, Justice Keith Blackwell said two weeks ago he was no longer seeking re-election and would resign a few weeks early -- eight months from now, in November.

For a few days, it looked like the race for his spot on the becnch would feature the two remaining candidates: John Barrow of Athens, a former Democratic congressman, and former Republican state legislator Beth Beskin of Atlanta. But a week ago, Kemp's successor as secretary of state, Republican Brad Raffensperger, said he was deferring to the governor's wishes and calling off a contest that was to be decided in the May 19 nonpartisan judicial elections.

Since the governor plans "to fill the created vacancy by appointment," an attorney for the secretary of state wrote the two suddenly vanquished candidates, "our office determined that the most prudent course of action was to cancel."

In response, Barrow and Beskin have filed lawsuits in state court saying Raffensperger had no right to call off the election and Kemp has no right to name a new justice because Blackwell is still on the job.

Barrow said canceling the election amounts to "the ultimate act of voter suppression" by depriving voters of their rights to fill one of the state's top posts.

Blackwell, 44, was put on the high court in 2012 by GOP Gov. Nathan Deal and won election in his own right two years later. But with two children getting ready for college, he said when announcing his resignation, his $175,000 government salary is not enough and he needs to return to private practice.

Of the nine Supreme Court justices, eight were originally put on the bench by appointment. Two justices, Charlie Bethel and Sarah Warren, are still standing for new terms in two months — and, for now at least, Beskin has shifted her sights and is challenging Bethel. But the odds are stacked against her as incumbent judges in Georgia rarely lose elections.


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