Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Covid-19 worry a worthy excuse to vote absentee in Texas, judge rules

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton (above at the 2016 GOP convention) said Wednesday the virus is not a valid reason for voting absentee -- on the same day a judge ruled the opposite.

Kirk Irwin/Getty Imagines

Fear of contracting coronavirus is a valid reason for Texans to vote by mail, a state judge has ruled.

The decision Wednesday by District Judge Tim Sulak, an Austin Democrat, came within hours of the opposite pronouncement from the office of Republican Attorney General Ken Paxton, which said the pandemic does not qualify as a legitimate excuse for voters to request an absentee ballot.

The contrasting rulings, in the state with the second most electoral votes, form the latest important example of how partisan the issue of mail-in voting has become across the country.


Democrats and good governance groups are pushing hard to expand voting by mail and otherwise ease access to the polls during the Covid-19 outbreak, in part by asking states that require a reason from citizens who want to vote absentee to waive those rules — or at least say coronavirus is covered by one of the permissible excuses.

Many Republicans, led by President Trump, oppose expanding mail-in voting, arguing it increases the chances of voter fraud. New studies out this week dispel such claims.

Sulak cited the pandemic in issuing a temporary injunction in a lawsuit filed by the Texas Democratic Party and voting rights groups, who want to broaden use of vote-by-mail in the primary runoffs in July and the November general election. The judge said it fit under a provision in state law allowing people with disabilities to request absentee ballots. Texas is one of 17 states that require a specific excuse to obtain an absentee ballot.

Paxton, who is expected to appeal, offered a withering critique of the decision. "This unlawful expansion of mail-in voting will only serve to undermine the security and integrity of our elections and to facilitate fraud," he said.

In addition to disability, Texas law also allows absentee ballots for people over 65, those in the military and people who will be away from home during voting.

The attorney general's opinion, written by a Paxton assistant, argues that fear of contracting coronavirus is not a sickness or a physical condition, but rather an emotional reaction to the pandemic that is not "sufficient to meet the definition of disability."

A week ago the state Democratic Party filed a second suit in federal court arguing that conducting the July 14 runoffs and the November election under current rules, at a time when stay-at-home orders or similar restrictions may be in place, would be unconstitutional and violate the Voting Rights Act.

Trump is confident of the state's 38 electoral votes, and the state has been carried by the GOP nominee without fail since 1976. But Democrats believe changing demographics give them a chance in a high-turnout election. Huge numbers would also give them a shot at a Senate upset and picking up as many as a half-dozen House seats across the state.


Read More

multiethnic American voters participating in the US election, showcasing the concept of choice in a democracy

Presidents who lost the popular vote often faced economic turmoil. See the pattern from Harrison to Trump and how a 50-state strategy could change it.

Alan Mazzocco/Getty Images

Path Forward from Economic Consequences of Non-Popular Vote Presidents

While losing the popular vote does not inherently cause economic ruin, the structural political weakness of entering office without a democratic majority mandate often compounded the economic challenges their administrations faced. These terms were marked by distinct economic hardships, structural imbalances, or severe financial crises.

Destabilizing Partisan Protectionism

Keep ReadingShow less
people filling out their ballots at voting booths and submitting their vote.

Independent voters may hand Democrats control of Congress this fall — but as history shows, they'll get nothing in return. Here's how to change that.

Pressmaster/Getty Images

Swinging Outcomes Is Not Enough

The midterms are six weeks away, and polls predict that independent voters, who broke for Donald Trump in 2024, are planning on voting for Democrats by wide margins. Among Latinos, the numbers are staggering, to the point that the Republican gerrymanders in Florida and Texas may actually result in Democratic victories.

If the Democrats take control of Congress, it will be because of independents. And what do independents get in return?

Keep ReadingShow less
Diverse People At Voting Booth. Vote Here Elections Sign

A political scientist examines how automatic voter registration is quietly turning non-affiliation into America's largest voting bloc.

AndreyPopov/Getty Images

When Neither Party Is the Default: Rethinking Representation As America’s Electorate Changes

For most of my career as a political scientist, representation was the central theme of my teaching and research. Early on, I studied how legislators understood their responsibilities to constituents — whether they saw themselves as delegates carrying out constituent mandates, trustees exercising independent judgment, or politicos combining both. That work asked a question that still matters: What does it mean to represent the public in a changing democracy?

Today I find myself asking a related question: What happens when the electorate changes but the institutions built to represent it do not?

Keep ReadingShow less
A person looks out at the North Tower pool at the 9/11 Memorial and Museum ahead of the 25th anniversary of the attack on the World Trade Center on September 7, 2026, in New York City.

A person looks out at the North Tower pool at the 9/11 Memorial and Museum ahead of the 25th anniversary of the attack on the World Trade Center on September 7, 2026, in New York City.

Gary Hershorn/Getty Images

How 9/11’s Memory Continues to Shape American Citizenship

Twenty‑five years after September 11th, the burden of that day continues to affect us in ways that are difficult to express. It was a moment of profound loss, but also one that revealed both the vulnerability and resilience of our national fabric. The memories remain vivid for many of us: where we were, what we felt, and how the world appeared to change in an instant. Even now, a quarter century later, the impact of that morning continues to shape how we understand our country, our responsibilities, and our relationships with one another.

To help us all reflect on that day, I invited four contributors to the Fulcrum to share reflections not to revisit the tragedy, but to commemorate the ways it has persisted in our consciousness twenty-five years later.

Keep ReadingShow less