Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Ranked-choice voting in Maine faces new challenge

Maine ranked-choice voting

Maine Gov. Janet Mills is among those being sued this week by citizens who want to block the use of ranked-choice voting in the fall election.

Ben McCanna/Getty Images

It turns out the battle over Maine's voting system isn't done yet.

When the Republican Party failed to turn in enough petition signatures last week to block the use of ranked-choice voting in Maine's presidential election this year, it seemed that fight was finished. But Maine, the one state that has approved RCV, is facing a new challenge.

A federal lawsuit filed this week seeks to block the use of ranked-choice voting in November, which would be another high-profile test of a system that advocates are trying to expand throughout the country. And it would play a role in the outcome of one of the most-watched Senate races in the country, featuring incumbent Republican Susan Collins.


The lawsuit — filed on behalf of four Maine voters against Gov. Janet Mills, Attorney General Aaron Frey and Secretary of State Matthew Dunlap — is the just the latest in a series of challenges to RCV in Maine, which was initially approved by voters in 2016 for use in state and congressional elections. The system allows people to vote for more than one candidate and rank their choices.

Proponents argue that it results in a truer reflection of voter support, achieves majority support before naming a winner, allows for an instant runoff that saves the time and expense of putting on another election, and makes for less harsh political campaigns.

Opponents say the system is confusing, and in this lawsuit they rely heavily on the argument that the value of some people's votes is diminished if they don't choose multiple candidates.

Maine voters again approved the idea in 2018 after the Legislature had rejected it and legislation later expanded it for use in the presidential race; an attempt to place another voter referendum on the ballot this fall — which would have halted its use in the 2020 election — failed because not enough valid signatures were gathered.

Ranked-choice voting resulted in Democrat Jared Golden ousting Republican Rep. Bruce Poliquin in 2018. Poliquin initially challenged the results in court but ended up withdrawing his lawsuit.

The latest suit argues that allowing ranked-choice voting in this fall would deny many voters full participation in the election. The argument is based largely on a study of the 2018 elections by Nolan McCarty, a Princeton University professor.

The study claims many voters were hurt because they did not understand how ranked-choice voting works and did not choose and rank enough candidates.

So, the argument goes, after the first round of ballot counting if no candidate has a majority, then the candidate receiving the lowest number of votes is eliminated and the second choice of those voters is applied in the second round of counting. (That's how Golden won despite trailing in the initial count.)

But if the voter did not make a second or subsequent selection, then their ballot is "exhausted" and, in effect, does not count, the suit argues.

It points out that the judge in the 2018 legal challenge ruled there was no empirical evidence to show that the system diminished the votes of some people.

It also argues that an election conducted using a larger number of absentee ballots, as is expected this fall because of the coronavirus pandemic, could exacerbate the problem. That's because people won't have a chance to get help with their ballot if they are voting at home.


Read More

Election Officials Have Been Preparing for AI Cyberattacks

People voting at a polling station

Brett Carlsen/Getty

Election Officials Have Been Preparing for AI Cyberattacks

Since ChatGPT and other generative artificial intelligence systems first became widely available, the Brennan Center and other experts have warned that this technology may lead to more cyberattacks on elections and other critical infrastructure. Reports that Anthropic’s new AI model, Claude Mythos, can pinpoint software vulnerabilities that even the most experienced human experts would miss underline the urgency of those risks. Fortunately, election officials have been preparing for cyberattacks and have made significant progress in securing their systems over the past decade, incorporating improved cybersecurity practices at every step of the election process.

Anthropic claims that its new model can autonomously scan for vulnerabilities in software more effectively than even expert security researchers. If given access to this new model, amateurs would theoretically be capable of identifying and exploiting vulnerabilities in a way that previously only sophisticated actors, such as nation-states, could do. For this reason, Anthropic chose not to release the Mythos model publicly. Instead, under an initiative Anthropic is calling Project Glasswing, it has offered access to Mythos to a number of high-profile tech firms and critical infrastructure operators so that these companies can proactively identify and address vulnerabilities in their own systems. Although Anthropic is currently controlling access to its model to prevent misuse, experts believe it is only a matter of time before tools advertising similar capabilities are broadly available.

Keep ReadingShow less
2026 Brennan Legacy Awards Celebrate Champions of Democracy

Superhero revealing American flag

BrianAJackson/Getty Images

2026 Brennan Legacy Awards Celebrate Champions of Democracy

The founders of our 18th‑century republic were acutely aware of how fragile their experiment in self‑government might prove, and one can easily imagine them welcoming a modern guardian like the Brennan Center for Justice. Within the wide canopy of organizations devoted to defending our democracy, the Center has emerged as a rare and unmistakable jewel.

For over 20 years, the Center has been dedicated to defending our democratic institutions and the rule of law, while protecting our civil liberties in the face of mounting authoritarian winds.

Keep ReadingShow less
Lessons Learned from “Lullabies from the Axis of Evil”

Residents sit amid debris in a residential building that was hit in an airstrike earlier this morning on March 30, 2026 in the west of Tehran, Iran.

(Photo by Majid Saeedi/Getty Images)

Lessons Learned from “Lullabies from the Axis of Evil”

There has been much commentary on the dark side of President Trump’s character and the lack of leadership at other high levels of government. These events and the American president's statements should not go unchallenged. His efforts to dehumanize an opponent and trivialize bombing campaigns as they are part of a video game are unfathomable and inconsistent with most of American history. We must never forget that America is killing people, many innocent civilians, with apparently little remorse.

The war in Iran has brought back a memory from when my son was born nearly 20 years ago. A friend of my wife’s, an anthropologist and college professor, sent us a baby gift. It was a CD of music titled “Lullabies from the Axis of Evil.” The term “Axis of Evil” was first used in President George W. Bush’s 2002 State of the Union speech. He was referring to three countries that make up the axis: Iraq, Iran, and North Korea. Putting aside, for the moment, our complicated relationship with those three countries, the lullabies CD reminds us that, despite our geopolitical differences, these countries are home to human beings. They work, love, eat, drink, and practice religion as we do – and they sing lullabies to their babies.

Keep ReadingShow less
Beyond the Politics: The Human Cost Behind the Israel–Iran Conflict

An Israeli and US flag is seen near the border with Southern Lebanon, as seen from a position on the Israeli side of the border on April 29, 2026 in Northern Israel, Israel.

(Photo by Amir Levy/Getty Images)