Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

North Dakota court boots wide-ranging reform measure from ballot

North Dakota map
FotografiaBasica/Getty Images

A sweeping election reform measure has been removed from the November ballot following a North Dakota Supreme Court ruling Tuesday.

The measure would have established an independent redistricting commission as well as other changes to the election process, if approved by voters. But the high court agreed with a lawsuit that claimed voters had been misled during the signature gathering process.

This year's general election is the last opportunity for some states to approve redistricting reforms before election maps are redrawn next year. The court's decision means North Dakota's legislative districts will remain subject to partisan gerrymandering for another decade. (The state's sole seat in the U.S. House isn't subject to remapping.)


Soon after North Dakota Voters First's reform initiative was approved for the ballot earlier this month, the conservative Brighter Future Alliance sued GOP Secretary of State Al Jaeger to remove it. The suit claimed petition canvassers failed to provide a full text of the measure when collecting signatures. Nearly 100 Republican state lawmakers — the party dominates both chambers — also filed a legal brief in opposition to the ballot measure.

In a 5-0 ruling, the justices ordered the measure be removed, saying "the petition does not comply with the constitutional requirement that it contain the full text of the measure." Jaeger said he intends to follow the court's instruction.

The measure would have put the state's nonpartisan ethics commission in charge of the redistricting process for the Legislature. It also would have established a top-four open primary system and ranked-choice voting.

"All North Dakotans should be alarmed at how an entire political establishment came together, used all the levers of power and government, marshaled the special interests together, and denied the voters the right to make a simple choice about how our elections should be governed," said Carol Sawicki, chairwoman of North Dakota Voters First.

With North Dakota's efforts dashed, Virginia and Arkansas are the only two states in which voters will decide this fall whether to approve redistricting reform measures. Oregon also attempted to get an anti-gerrymandering initiative on the ballot, but those efforts were blocked by the U.S. Supreme Court.

On the other hand, Missourians will vote on whether to undo a redistricting reform initiative they approved two years ago.

Currently, 36 states give lawmakers the authority to draw maps for their own legislatures. Ten states use nonpartisan commissions and four have commissions staffed by politicians. For congressional districts, eight states use independent commissions.


Read More

With the focus on the voting posters, the people in the background of the photo sign up to vote.

Should the U.S. nationalize elections? A constitutional analysis of federalism, the Elections Clause, and the risks of centralized control over voting systems.

Getty Images, SDI Productions

Why Nationalizing Elections Threatens America’s Federalist Design

The Federalism Question: Why Nationalizing Elections Deserves Skepticism

The renewed push to nationalize American elections, presented as a necessary reform to ensure uniformity and fairness, deserves the same skepticism our founders directed toward concentrated federal power. The proposal, though well-intentioned, misunderstands both the constitutional architecture of our republic and the practical wisdom in decentralized governance.

The Constitutional Framework Matters

The Constitution grants states explicit authority over the "Times, Places and Manner" of holding elections, with Congress retaining only the power to "make or alter such Regulations." This was not an oversight by the framers; it was intentional design. The Tenth Amendment reinforces this principle: powers not delegated to the federal government remain with the states and the people. Advocates for nationalization often cite the Elections Clause as justification, but constitutional permission is not constitutional wisdom.

Keep ReadingShow less
Postal Service Changes Mean Texas Voters Shouldn’t Wait To Mail Voter Registrations and Ballots

A voter registration drive in Corpus Christi, Texas, on Oct. 5, 2024. The deadline to register to vote for Texas' March 3 primary election is Feb. 2, 2026. Changes to USPS policies may affect whether a voter registration application is processed on time if it's not postmarked by the deadline.

Gabriel Cárdenas for Votebeat

Postal Service Changes Mean Texas Voters Shouldn’t Wait To Mail Voter Registrations and Ballots

Texans seeking to register to vote or cast a ballot by mail may not want to wait until the last minute, thanks to new guidance from the U.S. Postal Service.

The USPS last month advised that it may not postmark a piece of mail on the same day that it takes possession of it. Postmarks are applied once mail reaches a processing facility, it said, which may not be the same day it’s dropped in a mailbox, for example.

Keep ReadingShow less
Post office trucks parked in a lot.

Changes to USPS postmarking, ranked choice voting fights, costly runoffs, and gerrymandering reveal growing cracks in U.S. election systems.

Photo by Sam LaRussa on Unsplash.

2026 Will See an Increase in Rejected Mail-In Ballots - Here's Why

While the media has kept people’s focus on the Epstein files, Venezuela, or a potential invasion of Greenland, the United States Postal Service adopted a new rule that will have a broad impact on Americans – especially in an election year in which millions of people will vote by mail.

The rule went into effect on Christmas Eve and has largely flown under the radar, with the exception of some local coverage, a report from PBS News, and Independent Voter News. It states that items mailed through USPS will no longer be postmarked on the day it is received.

Keep ReadingShow less
People voting at voting booths.

A little-known interstate compact could change how the U.S. elects presidents by 2028, replacing the Electoral College with the national popular vote.

Getty Images, VIEW press

The Quiet Campaign That Could Rewrite the 2028 Election

Most Americans are unaware, but a quiet campaign in states across the country is moving toward one of the biggest changes in presidential elections since the nation was founded.

A movement called the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC) is happening mostly out of public view and could soon change how the United States picks its president, possibly as early as 2028.

Keep ReadingShow less