Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Suit filed against Va. witness requirements for absentee voters

United States and Virginia flags
Oleksii Liskonih/Getty Images

It ended up as a second-tier dispute in the legal battle over Wisconsin's election, but now it's been revived with potentially more prominence. The question: Is it fair, or even constitutional, to require voters during the pandemic to get close to someone who can countersign their mail-in ballots?

A federal appeals court this month refused to suspend Wisconsin's witness rule, saying the potential for fraud outweighed the risks of spreading Covid-19 during close contact over absentee ballots.

The same argument will now be revisited in Virginia. The American Civil Liberties Union asked a federal judge Friday to block a similar law in Virginia, one requiring voters to find someone to witness them completing their absentee ballots.


The lawsuit, filed on behalf of three voters and the League of Women Voters, argues the law will otherwise force people who live alone or can't get to a polling place to choose between skipping the presidential election and risking their health. And the result, the claim says, could be "massive disenfranchisement" in both the June 23 congressional primaries and in November — especially of the almost one-third of Virginians older than 65 who live alone, and are in the age group most vulnerable to the novel coronavirus.

State officials signaled a response to the ACLU's filing was possible.

"Free and fair elections are at the core of our democracy and no Virginian should have to choose between their health and exercising their right to vote," said Charlotte Gomer, a spokeswoman for Democratic Attorney General Mark Herring.

Ten other states have such witness requirements. Virginia, Wisconsin and North Carolina are the only purplish 2020 battlegrounds. Rhode Island is the only blue state on the roster, which otherwise includes reliably red Alabama, Alaska, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Oklahoma and South Carolina.

Virginia's law is one of the most explicit. It says a voter who submits an absentee ballot by mail must open the envelope containing the ballot in front of another person, fill out the paper and then ask the witness to sign the outside of the envelope before it is mailed.

The state permits people to get such a ballot without having an excuse, and about 10 percent of its votes have been cast absentee in most recent elections.

The lawsuit is part of a broader campaign in courthouses across the country, by Democrats and their allies in the civil rights and voting rights communities, to use the public health crisis as a lever to ease restrictions on voting this year.

Although some Republican governors have decided to ease the rules in their states, many GOP elected officials are following President Trump's lead and opposing any loosening of restrictions on the grounds that would spur election fraud. But there is minimal evidence, at best, of such crimes.

"It's just another attempt by the Democrats to make voter fraud easier," said John March, a spokesman for the Virginia GOP.


Read More

Voters lining up to vote.

Voters line up at the Oak Lawn Branch Library voting center on Primary Election Day in Dallas on March 3, 2026. Republicans' decision to hold a split primary from the Democrats and to eliminate countywide voting forced Dallas County voters to cast ballots at assigned neighborhood precincts, leading to confusion. Republicans have now decided to use countywide polling locations for the May 26 runoff election.

Shelby Tauber for The Texas Tribune

Dallas County GOP Will Agree To Use Countywide Voting Sites for May 26 Runoff Election

Dallas County Republicans will agree to allow voters to cast ballots at countywide voting sites for the May 26 runoff election after a switch to precinct-based voting sites caused chaos, the county party chair said Tuesday.

Dallas County Republican Chairman Allen West supported the use of precinct-based sites earlier this month, but said using precincts again for the runoff would expose the county party to “increased risk and voter confusion” because the county is planning to use countywide sites for upcoming municipal elections and early voting.

Keep ReadingShow less
A person signing a piece of paper with other people around them.

Javon Jackson, center, was able to register to vote following passage of a 2019 Nevada law that restored voting rights to formerly incarcerated individuals.

The Nation Is Missing Millions of Voters Due to Lack of Rights for Former Felons

If you gathered every American with a prison record into one contiguous territory and admitted it to the union, you would create the 12th-largest state. It would be home to at least 7 million to 8 million people and hold a dozen votes in the Electoral College.

In a close presidential race, this hypothetical state of the formerly incarcerated could decide who wins the White House.

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

An analysis of Trump’s SAVE Act strategy, the voter ID debate, and how Pew data is being misused—exploring election integrity, voter suppression, and the political fight shaping U.S. democracy.

Getty Images, SDI Productions

Stop Fighting Voter ID. Start Defining It.

President Trump doesn't need the SAVE America Act to pass. He only needs the debate to continue. Every minute spent arguing about voter suppression repeats the underlying premise — that noncitizen voting is a real and widespread problem — until it feels like an established fact. The question is whether Democrats will contest Republicans’ definition before the frame hardens.

Trump's claim that 88% of Americans support the bill traces to a Pew Research Center survey — a survey that found 83% support a “government-issued photo ID to vote,” not extreme vetting for proof of citizenship. That support included 95% of Republicans and 71% of Democrats, indicating genuine, broad, bipartisan support for a basic civic principle. That's worth taking seriously.

Keep ReadingShow less
People standing at voting booths.

The proposed SAVE Act and MEGA Act would require proof of citizenship to register to vote, risking the disenfranchisement of millions of eligible Americans.

Getty Images, EvgeniyShkolenko

The SAVE Act is a Solution in Search of A Problem

The federal government seems to be barreling toward a federal election power grab. Trump's State of the Union address called for the Senate to push through the SAVE Act, which has already passed the House, in the name of so-called "election integrity." And the SAVE Act isn’t the only such bill. Like the SAVE Act, the Make Elections Great Again (MEGA) Act—introduced in the House—would require voters to provide a document outlined in the Act that allegedly proves their U.S. citizenship. We’ve been down this road before in Texas, and spoiler alert: it was unworkable.

Both the SAVE and MEGA Acts would disenfranchise millions of eligible U.S. citizens without making our federal elections more secure. They seek to roll out a faulty federal voter registration system, despite the existing separate registration and voting process for state and local elections. And these Acts target a minuscule “problem”—but would unleash mass voter purges and confusion.

Keep ReadingShow less