Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Illinois has badly fumbled AVR, and now it's being sued for voting rights abuse

Voters in Illinois

A lawsuit claims Illinois' handling of the AVR system has hindered voter registration in three elections.

Scott Olson/Getty Images

A coalition of progressive advocacy groups is suing Illinois for allegedly botching the rollout of the state's automatic voter registration system for three years.

When the state enacted AVR in 2017, those groups hoped it would modernize and streamline registration and make the ballot box more readily accessible to members of minority groups and non-English speakers. But the lawsuit, filed Friday, alleges the state has badly fumbled the execution, causing repeated record-keeping errors and voter confusion that violate federal voting rights law.

Things are so bad, the plaintiffs maintain, that federal judges in Chicago should take control of the system until it's put right.


AVR has gained in popularity in recent years precisely because it's supposed to make registration simpler for both voters and bureaucrats. Illinois is the second-most-populous, after Calfifornia, of the 16 states (plus D.C.) where eligible people are automatically added to the voter rolls whenever they do business with the motor vehicle bureau — or, in some places, other state agencies that keep personal information on residents.

The suit alleges multiple failings in the state's system. For instance, last month, 774 convicted felons who had re-registered after their release from prison had their registrations canceled due to a "data-matching error." The state Board of Elections corrected this in time for the start of early voting in the March 17 presidential, congressional and legislative primary.

In January, a glitch in the system mistakenly added nearly 600 noncitizens to the rolls after they applied for a driver's license or identification card. They have since been removed.

Under the 2017 law, when voting-age residents go to the DMV to update or obtain their driver's license, a state employee is supposed to check their voter registration status and ensure their address is up to date. But the lawsuit alleges this often doesn't happen, leaving many residents off the voter rolls.

The state's AVR system also has mistakenly suggested that 16-year-olds are eligible to vote, the suit alleges. Only residents who will be 17 before the next primary and 18 before the next general are eligible to register.

The advocacy groups claim the state's handling of AVR has hindered voter registration in three elections: the 2018 midterm and two local elections last year. It also presents "an imminent threat" of doing so again in the primaries and in November.

"Unfortunately, the promise of voter modernization and inclusivity has not only gone unfulfilled, it now appears that even basic voter registration services are mishandled in disregard of repeated calls for transparency and accountability by non-partisan organizations in the state," says the lawsuit, filed by the Asian Americans Advancing Justice-Chicago, Change Illinois, Chicago Votes Education Fund, Common Cause Illinois, Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights and the Illinois Public Interest Research Group Education Fund.

Read More

U.S. President Barack Obama speaking on the phone in the Oval Office.

U.S. President Barack Obama talks President Barack Obama talks with President Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan during a phone call from the Oval Office on November 2, 2009 in Washington, DC.

Getty Images, The White House

‘Obama, You're 15 Years Too Late!’

The mid-decade redistricting fight continues, while the word “hypocrisy” has become increasingly common in the media.

The origin of mid-decade redistricting dates back to the early history of the United States. However, its resurgence and legal acceptance primarily stem from the Texas redistricting effort in 2003, a controversial move by the Republican Party to redraw the state's congressional districts, and the 2006 U.S. Supreme Court decision in League of United Latin American Citizens v. Perry. This decision, which confirmed that mid-decade redistricting is not prohibited by federal law, was a significant turning point in the acceptance of this practice.

Keep ReadingShow less
Hand of a person casting a ballot at a polling station during voting.

Gerrymandering silences communities and distorts elections. Proportional representation offers a proven path to fairer maps and real democracy.

Getty Images, bizoo_n

Gerrymandering Today, Gerrymandering Tomorrow, Gerrymandering Forever

In 1963, Alabama Governor George Wallace declared, "Segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever." (Watch the video of his speech.) As a politically aware high school senior, I was shocked by the venom and anger in his voice—the open, defiant embrace of systematic disenfranchisement, so different from the quieter racism I knew growing up outside Boston.

Today, watching politicians openly rig elections, I feel that same disbelief—especially seeing Republican leaders embrace that same systematic approach: gerrymandering now, gerrymandering tomorrow, gerrymandering forever.

Keep ReadingShow less
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