Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Will Maryland remap itself before Supreme Court acts?

The race is on to see whether a new, more politically competitive congressional map is adopted by the Maryland legislature before the Supreme Court decides if the current map is unconstitutional.

Last week, an independent commission created by GOP Gov. Larry Hogan unanimously embraced a plan to reconfigure two House districts encompassing some Washington suburbs. Even while leaving the rest of the state's sometimes incomprehensibly contorted boundaries intact, a cartographer ( redistricting writer Stephen Wolf of the liberal Daily Kos politics website) figured out a visibly clean way to give Republicans a reasonable shot at electing a second House member from the state.


He refigured the 6th district to cover the entire panhandle and stretch as far southeast as Germantown, with most of the rest of Montgomery County south and east of Gaithersburg falling in a new 8th district far more compact and contiguous than as currently drawn.

After a period of public comment, Hogan is on course to send the map to Annapolis on March 22. The solidly Democratic General Assembly would then have until its annual session concludes April 8 to accept or reject it. But two weeks before that deadline, on March 26, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on a potential landmark case asking whether the existing map is an unconstitutional partisan gerrymander because its contours virtually guarantee that only one of the eight House members from the state is a Republican – even though the GOP reliably wins 40 percent of the vote statewide.

That case is paired with a challenge to the map for North Carolina, where the GOP has held a 12-3 advantage in the congressional delegation all decade even though the total statewide vote for congressional candidates is split almost 50-50 each time. The court is being asked to decide if such maps can ever be drawn with such clear partisan intent as to become unconstitutional.


Read More

What Comes Next for the 1 Million People Who Have Lost – or Will Soon Lose – Temporary Protected Status

People hold Haitian flags and signs during a July 2026 rally in San Diego in support of immigrants living in the U.S. with Temporary Protected Status.

What Comes Next for the 1 Million People Who Have Lost – or Will Soon Lose – Temporary Protected Status

At the beginning of President Donald Trump’s second term, 1.3 million individuals from 17 countries were living and working in the U.S. under Temporary Protected Status, or TPS.

TPS is a humanitarian form of protection from deportation for people who cannot return to their home countries because of an armed conflict, environmental disaster or other extraordinary circumstances.

Keep ReadingShow less
vote pins

vote pins in red, white, and blue with stars and stripes.

Getty Images

The Long Fight to Secure Voting Rights for All Americans

Many Americans think that all US citizens aged 18 or older are entitled to vote. In fact, that has never really been the case in the USA. It has been a tremendously long, hard road to get to where we are today.

The easy part is that the Twenty-Sixth Amendment to the US Constitution lowered the voting age from 21 to 18 in 1971, in response to the Vietnam War. It was considered unjust to draft men to war who were denied the right to vote. In several states felons are denied the right to vote for life.

Keep ReadingShow less
Seattle Washington city downtown skyline

Seattle Washington city downtown skyline during sunset

Getty Images

Local Seattle Government and Indigenous Communities Unite for Sustainable Efforts

Sustainability in government is a discussion at both the local and national levels. What is common today is that this conversation has long excluded Indigenous communities' voices and perspectives from the legislative process.

Too often, local governments enact environmental and sustainability legislation without considering its impact on Indigenous groups.

Keep ReadingShow less
Woman checking mail

Close-up of woman's hand putting or receiving letter with voting ballot near a mailbox near her house -

Getty Images

Why Having a Ballot at Home Strengthens Civic Engagement

A legal challenge regarding mail-in voting rules and postal service regulations is currently moving through the federal court system as the midterm elections approach. The dispute involves administrative directives and postal regulations concerning ballot delivery standards and state requirements. Lower courts have previously addressed how these rules are implemented, prompting appeals and legal filings from various administration officials, state attorneys general, and election administrators over operational timelines and voter access.

Brian Miller is the executive director of Nonprofit VOTE, a nationwide organization that works to help nonprofits engage the communities they serve in voting and elections.
In the article "Voting Is Not a Closed-Book Test," Miller explores mail-in voting and why giving voters time and access is critical to a healthy democracy.

Keep ReadingShow less