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.

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

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