Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Project 2025: The Voting Rights Act

People protesting for voting rights in front of the Capitol

Protesters calling for voting rights protections march in Washington, D.C., in 2023.

Michael Nigro/Pacific Press/LightRocket via Getty Images

Adair is communications and operations manager for Stand Up America.

This is part of a series offering a nonpartisan counter to Project 2025, a conservative guideline to reforming government and policymaking during the first 180 days of a second Trump administration. The Fulcrum's cross partisan analysis of Project 2025 relies on unbiased critical thinking, reexamines outdated assumptions, and uses reason, scientific evidence, and data in analyzing and critiquing Project 2025.

As we mark the 59th anniversary of the Voting Rights Act this week, Black voters and other voters of color face a renewed effort to erode critical civil rights protections and to increase barriers at the ballot box.

The Voting Rights Act was designed to safeguard voters of color from discriminatory practices that diminish their voting power. In recent years, the Supreme Court has chipped away at the VRA’s protections, undermining the power of voters of color. However, some on the right would like to go even further. Project 2025, the Heritage Foundation’s extreme agenda for a second Trump administration, could take America back to the Jim Crow era.


Project 2025 stands as the antithesis to the spirit of the Voting Rights Act. It seeks to fundamentally alter the federal government and reshape every aspect of Americans’ lives by implementing an anti-democratic, far-right agenda aimed at taking away our fundamental rights and freedoms.

Project 2025 proposes stripping the Department of Justice’s integral Civil Rights Division, which defends Americans of color in civil rights cases. This would open the floodgates for bad actors to discriminate against Americans of color in every aspect of their lives, from voting rights to housing to employment to education. This election year alone, the DOJ has already stood on the side of voters in New Hampshire who received intimidating calls as part of a robocall scheme during their presidential primary — calls that were a direct violation of the Voting Rights Act.

The proposal would also raise campaign contribution limits, giving the rich and powerful an even louder voice in our elections and drowning out the voices of ordinary citizens. It would be remiss to ignore that white Americans make up the majority of this affluent group.

Project 2025 would force the DOJ’s Criminal Division to investigate “voter registration fraud and unlawful ballot correction” — currently a responsibility of the Civil Rights Division. The myth of widespread voter fraud has continually been disproven, and this change only seeks to intimidate Black voters suffering disproportionately from these falsehoods.

It’s no surprise that Project 2025 targets the civil rights and political power of Americans of color. At least five of the authors of the agenda, like writer Richard Hanania and retired politician Corey Stewart, have a history of writing essays for white supremacist publications or praising white nationalists. Project 2025 clearly promotes hate and division, evidenced by the fact that seven of the organizations sitting on the advisory board are designated as extremist or hate groups.

However, there’s still time to inform voters — particularly voters of color — of who’s behind Project 2025 and the extreme policies they are pushing. Some political leaders, including members of the Congressional Black Caucus, are already highlighting the harm many policies would unleash on Black and Brown communities. Black leaders in the pro-democracy space launched Project FREEDOM to help educate and mobilize voters of color ahead of November.

Former President Donald Trump wants to feign ignorance and distance himself from Project 2025, acting as if it has nothing to do with his campaign. Americans shouldn’t be fooled when our rights and fundamental freedoms are on the line. At least 140 people who helped craft Project 2025 worked in the Trump administration as key advisors or former staff.

The 59th anniversary of the Voting Rights Act reminds us of the sacrifice and resistance of Black leaders in the civil rights movement and the ongoing struggle to cultivate a truly representative democracy. There’s a lot at stake this November and Project 2025 presents a unique threat to our democracy. Let’s honor the work of those who came before us by making our voices heard this November. By defeating Project 2025 we will protect our fundamental freedoms.

More articles about Project 2025



    Read More

     Unrecognizable doctor prescribing pharmacy to patient.

    After a 30-year decline, U.S. abortions are rising again. Texas data suggests bans may shift where abortions happen — not whether they do.

    Natalia Gdovskaia/Getty Images

    Pro-Life and Pro-Choice: Bridging the Gap

    Introduction

    We have spent decades arguing about abortion policy on ideological grounds. I think we now have an opportunity to step back, look at what actually happened, and ask a more fundamental question: What policies actually reduce the number of abortions?

    I believe that is a question on which pro-life and pro-choice people should be able to agree. Whatever our differences about abortion itself, surely, we can agree that fewer abortions would be a good outcome.

    Keep ReadingShow less
    U.S. Capitol.

    A rundown of the House bills most likely to become law this week — from seafood fraud enforcement to a sanctions bill critics call a tariff bill.

    Photo by Andy Feliciotti on Unsplash

    Both Chambers in Session this Week

    Last Minute Rush

    We’re not going to describe every bill the House aims to take action on this week because there’s lots. Instead, we’re going to focus on the ones that will become law if passed by the House and pull a few notable bills at the beginning of the legislative process. We’ll use the same level of discretion at the end of this week when we review what actually happened between today, Monday Sept. 14 and Friday, Sept. 18.

    Probable New Laws

    In addition to the bills listed below are also a couple of park renamings. All of these will, if passed, then go to the President for signing and once that’s done, become law.

    Keep ReadingShow less
    The White House, Washington, DC
    A large white building with a fountain in front of it

    We Can and Should Reform the President’s Pardon Power

    On August 21, Congressman Jamie Raskin, the ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, released a report entitled “Pardons, Inc.: How Trump and His Clemency-for-Cash Racket Let White-Collar Criminals and International Drug Dealers Walk Free and Dodge Billions in Restitution Owed to Their Victims.” As the title suggests, the report documents the president’s startling abuse of his constitutional power to grant pardons and reprieves.

    If that problem were limited to Trump, we might look to the ballot box to remedy it. But it is not.

    Keep ReadingShow less
    The Trump Administration’s Plan for Protecting Consumers? Politely Ask Companies to Behave.

    Russell Vought, the acting director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, testified before the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs in July.

    Samuel Corum/Sipa USA via AP Images

    The Trump Administration’s Plan for Protecting Consumers? Politely Ask Companies to Behave.

    In mid-July testimony before Congress, Russell Vought boasted that, as the acting head of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, he’d refashioned the agency’s approach to pursuing banks and other financial companies accused of exploiting Americans — the role Congress had created for the agency after the 2008 economic crash.

    Vought had spent the first 18 months of the new Trump administration trying to dismantle the bureau, much as he and other appointees had done with the U.S. Agency for International Development. At CFPB, he’d ordered mass layoffs, tried to choke off the bureau’s funding and ended the lease on its headquarters, attempting to make good on his vow to put civil servants “in trauma.” But federal courts blocked Vought’s efforts to close the CFPB, with a judge at one point saying the administration had acted with “complete disregard” for Congress.

    Keep ReadingShow less