Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

No-excuse fight revived in Arkansas, 35 years after its top court ruled in favor

absentee ballot
Darylann Elmi/Getty Images

The legal crusade to make mail voting easier this year has finally arrived in Arkansas, where some of the nation's toughest ballot restrictions haven't been challenged until now because the coronavirus pandemic arrived after the primaries.

Two prominent Democrats in the deeply red state filed a lawsuit Tuesday alleging the Arkansas election law flatly violates a 35-year-old state Supreme Court ruling that greatly expanded the right to absentee balloting. They asked a state judge in Little Rock to order election officials to stop demanding a detailed excuse from anyone who requests an absentee ballot — which resulted in 99 percent of votes being cast in person two years ago.

GOP Secretary of State John Thurston signaled he would fight the suit. "Given where we are at with the Covid-19 pandemic," he said, "the current voting system will be adequate."


The plaintiffs are Olly Neal Jr., who retired as the longest-serving Black appeals court judge in state history, and Susan Inman, a former top state elections official. Both are in their 70s and assert they fear catching Covid-19 if they are compelled to vote in person Nov. 3.

Their case, like many others across the country, argues that requiring an excused absence from a polling place — the sort of close-quarters indoor space where the coronavirus can be most easily spread — will force voters to make an unconstitutional choice between participating in democracy and protecting their health.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

The novel twist is that the law — which allows absentee voting only for those who are in the military or traveling overseas or can provide evidence they will be "unavoidably absent or unable to attend an election due to illness or physical disability" — seems to fly in the face of the view of the state's highest court.

It held in 1985 that voters are not required to explain why they do not want to vote in person and "that any and all reasons or excuses are valid, legitimate excuses for an Arkansas citizen to be unavoidably absent."

The litigation is the latest in a nationwide wave of efforts in federal and state courthouses to make voting both easy and safe this year — mainly by expanding use of the mail, which President Trump asserts without any evidence will lead to a wave of fraud. But, no matter what, the president can relax about holding the six Arkansas electoral votes and the entirely Republican congressional delegation is sure to stay that way.

The number of Covid-19 cases has doubled in Arkansas the past month, even as the spread of the disease has declined in most states, and 227 people have died.

The state's primaries were in early March, a couple of weeks before the pandemic forced a nearly nationwide shutdown. Republican Gov. Asa Hutchinson has never issued a statewide stay-at-home order, but he did sign an executive order allowing no-excuse absentee voting in a May special election.

The GOP-dominated General Assembly in April blocked Democratic legislation that would have allowed all voters to choose for this year only whether to cast ballots by mail or in person.

The suit seeks to make the state spend its $4.7 million in federal election aid on sending absentee applications to all registered voters in postage-paid ballot return envelopes and local drop boxes.

Read More

One Lesson from the Elections: Looking At Universal Voting

A roll of "voted" stickers.

Pexels, Element5 Digital

One Lesson from the Elections: Looking At Universal Voting

The analysis and parsing of learned lessons from the 2024 elections will continue for a long time. What did the campaigns do right and wrong? What policies will emerge from the new arrangements of power? What do the parties need to do for the future?

An equally important question is what lessons are there for our democratic structures and processes. One positive lesson is that voting itself was almost universally smooth and effective; we should applaud the election officials who made that happen. But, many elements of the 2024 elections are deeply challenging, from the increasingly outsized role of billionaires in the process to the onslaught of misinformation and disinformation.

Keep ReadingShow less
MERGER: The Organization that Brought Ranked Choice Voting and Ended SuperPACs in Maine Joins California’s Nonpartisan Primary Pioneers

A check mark and hands.

Photo by Allison Saeng on Unsplash. Unsplash+ License obtained by the author.

MERGER: The Organization that Brought Ranked Choice Voting and Ended SuperPACs in Maine Joins California’s Nonpartisan Primary Pioneers

Originally published by Independent Voter News.

Today, I am proud to share an exciting milestone in my journey as an advocate for democracy and electoral reform.

Keep ReadingShow less
Half-Baked Alaska

A photo of multiple checked boxes.

Getty Images / Thanakorn Lappattaranan

Half-Baked Alaska

This past year’s elections saw a number of state ballot initiatives of great national interest, which proposed the adoption of two “unusual” election systems for state and federal offices. Pairing open nonpartisan primaries with a general election using ranked choice voting, these reforms were rejected by the citizens of Colorado, Idaho, and Nevada. The citizens of Alaska, however, who were the first to adopt this dual system in 2020, narrowly confirmed their choice after an attempt to repeal it in November.

Ranked choice voting, used in Alaska’s general elections, allows voters to rank their candidate choices on their ballot and then has multiple rounds of voting until one candidate emerges with a majority of the final vote and is declared the winner. This more representative result is guaranteed because in each round the weakest candidate is dropped, and the votes of that candidate’s supporters automatically transfer to their next highest choice. Alaska thereby became the second state after Maine to use ranked choice voting for its state and federal elections, and both have had great success in their use.

Keep ReadingShow less
Top-Two Primaries Under the Microscope

The United States Supreme Court.

Getty Images / Rudy Sulgan

Top-Two Primaries Under the Microscope

Fourteen years ago, after the Supreme Court ruled unconstitutional the popular blanket primary system, Californians voted to replace the deeply unpopular closed primary that replaced it with a top-two system. Since then, Democratic Party insiders, Republican Party insiders, minor political parties, and many national reform and good government groups, have tried (and failed) to deep-six the system because the public overwhelmingly supports it (over 60% every year it’s polled).

Now, three minor political parties, who opposed the reform from the start and have unsuccessfully sued previously, are once again trying to overturn it. The Peace and Freedom Party, the Green Party, and the Libertarian Party have teamed up to file a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. Their brief repeats the same argument that the courts have previously rejected—that the top-two system discriminates against parties and deprives voters of choice by not guaranteeing every party a place on the November ballot.

Keep ReadingShow less