Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Georgia's long lines focus of the latest elections lawsuit

Georgia voting

Democrats have filed a lawsuit against Georgia election officials over the long waits voters have had in recent elections, including this scene from the June 9 primary.

Emma Hurt/Twitter

Georgia, which has been sued plenty in recent years for allegedly violating the rights of its electorate, is facing a fresh complaint about voter suppression of the most obvious kind: Making people stand in line for hours to exercise their democratic rights.

The lawsuit, filed in federal court Thursday, is the latest development in the courthouse crusade to make it easier to vote in the presidential election.

In neighboring Alabama, a state judge this week dismissed a lawsuit that sought to ease voting rules for the elderly and disabled. And Friday saw the latest in a series of suits, this time in Pennsylvania, seeking to guarantee a do-over for people who make mistakes on their absentee ballot forms.

These are the latest developments:


Georgia

The new suit will gain particular notice because of the state's evolution into one of the most prominent political battlegrounds of the year. The contest for the state's 16 electoral votes is now a tossup, an array of recent polls shows, and in an unusual twist both Senate seats are on the ballot this fall and have become highly competitive. So Georgia's turnout has taken on extraordinary importance.

The state Democratic Party and the party's Senate campaign arm are convinced their candidates will do best with as many people voting as possible. Their suit says the long lines that forced people to wait upwards of eight hours in stifling heat to vote in the June 9 primary violated the Constitution.

Sara Alami of Fulton County, which takes in much of Atlanta, arrived at her polling place half an hour before the doors opened — and still had to wait six hours. Another resident of the county, 71-year-old Lucille Anderson, gave up trying to vote after confronting the long lines at her polling place three times — in the morning, midafternoon and evening.

Two years ago voters in Georgia waited to vote longer than in any other state, a full 2.5 times the national average, according to the suit.

The Democrats allege the long lines were because of the reductions in the number of polling places, late opening of polling places, not enough voting machines, not enough technicians to fix broken machines and poor training. They asked a judge to order all those problems get fixed before November.

Pennsylvania

The newest litigation in the battleground state mirrors those in several other such presidential tossups, where the rate of absentee ballot rejection could prove decisive in November.

The suit asks a federal judge to require that voters be notified if their ballots get rejected because the signature line on the envelope is blank or the handwriting does not match what's on file at the election office — and be given a chance to remedy the problem.

"Pennsylvania must create a uniform process to let voters fix signature-related issues with their mail-in ballots in order to give people confidence that their vote is being counted," said Paul Smith of the Campaign Legal Center, which sued on behalf of the League of Women Voters, the League of United Latin American Citizens Council and the Urban League of Greater Pittsburgh.

Alabama

Civil Court Judge J.R. Gaines of Montgomery on Wednesday threw out a lawsuit filed by the League of Women Voters and several sick or elderly citizens. It said the health of voters during the pandemic was illegally threatened by the requirement for two witnesses or a notary to countersign an absentee ballot envelope.

The judge said the suit raised political issues that shouldn't be decided in the courts. He also said the plaintiffs had no legal standing to file the suit and that the election officials were protected from being sued.


Read More

Poll: Voters Want Solutions for Government Corruption
Greggory DiSalvo/Getty

Poll: Voters Want Solutions for Government Corruption

A new Brennan Center survey finds that large majorities of Republicans, Democrats, and independents share deep-seated concerns about government corruption, which most voters define broadly and blame for many of the country’s biggest problems going unaddressed. The survey, fielded to 2,000 registered voters across the country between April 28 and May 6, also finds widespread support for key anticorruption reforms, such as new limits on money in elections and stronger protections against self-dealing by high-ranking government officials.

The key findings include:

Keep ReadingShow less
Shadow on a wall of Judge hitting gavel in court, concept of justice, law, and legal protection

The Rule of Law depends on action, not blind optimism. Explore how critical hope, civic engagement, and accountability can strengthen democracy.

Aitor Diago / Getty Images

Only Collective Action Can Turn Outrage Into Accountability and Protect the Rule of Law

The past year has shaken our faith in institutions and, perhaps, in each other. If not already eviscerated, the Rule of Law is under attack. In this atmosphere of constant chaos, we have become numbed by the events of each day and the scope of unprecedented executive action. Yet, even in the face of growing autocracy and oligarchy, the Rule of Law can prevail.

“There is a crack, a crack in everything. That’s how the light gets in.” In the current moment, it is tempting to reach for hope as comfort, or to repeat familiar lines about resilience, unity, or the promise of American ideals—such as this one from Leonard Cohen. But as educator Jeffrey Duncan-Andrade warns, not all hope is created equal. The kind of hope that ignores suffering, that insists the Rule of Law will revive itself without action, is not hope at all. It is what he calls “hokey or “mythical hope,” a passive optimism that ultimately deepens despair. What this moment demands instead is “critical hope”: a form of hope grounded in struggle and action.

Keep ReadingShow less
stethoscope and us dollar bills on blue-colored background.

Millions of Americans face rising healthcare costs and coverage gaps. Learn how strengthening the Affordable Care Act can improve affordability and access.

Getty Images, aaaaimages

When Health Care Becomes a Choice, Something Is Broken

Recently, a nurse told me she had to choose between paying for her husband’s surgery and putting a new roof on their home. “We’re praying for no rain,” she said. In that moment, the distance between political promises and real life collapsed. This is what the economy feels like for millions of Americans — not a graph, not a headline, but a quiet calculation of which basic need they can afford to meet. No family in a nation as wealthy as ours should have to rely on the weather to survive.

For years, Americans were promised that the Affordable Care Act (ACA) would be replaced with something better, cheaper, and available to everyone. That promise never became policy. Congress never passed a comprehensive replacement. The closest attempt, the American Health Care Act (AHCA), collapsed under the weight of its own numbers. The Congressional Budget Office found that it would have left 23 million more Americans uninsured, caused 14 million to lose coverage in the first year alone, cut Medicaid by $834 billion, and raised premiums for older adults to levels many could never pay. A 64‑year‑old making $26,500 a year would have seen premiums jump from $1,700 under the ACA to more than $14,000. Protections for people with pre‑existing conditions would have weakened. That is not “better.” That is not “cheaper.” And it certainly was not “for everyone.”

Keep ReadingShow less