Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Second suit challenges limits on helping others vote in Minnesota

Disabled voting

The suit challenges state-imposed limits on how much help people are allowed to give to disabled voters, including the visually impaired and people who do not speak English.

Scott Olson/ Getty Images

Four Hmong-Americans are challenging Minnesota's restrictions on who may assist voters in casting their ballots.

It is the second lawsuit this year claiming state law discriminates against disabled and non-English-speaking voters who need the help of others when they vote. Three weeks ago the Democratic Party's House and Senate campaign committees brought a similar claim. Both were filed in state court in St. Paul.

The claims are part of a surge in varied litigation by progressive groups and Democratic operatives seeking to win advances in voting rights via the courts in advance of Election Day. Most suits are being filed in presidential or congressional battleground states where the legislatures are not inclined to ease access to the ballot box.


The Minnesota statute being challenged says candidates for office may not help people vote, and others may not help more than three voters complete in-person or absentee ballots. The intent of the law is to prevent efforts by partisan agents to unwittingly manipulate the votes of elderly, disabled and non-English-speaking voters.

Tuesday's suit, filed by the American Civil Liberties Union of Minnesota, argues the law places a particular burden on the large communities of Somalis and Hmong people from Southeast Asia who have settled in Minnesota — in violation of both the federal and state constitutions and the Voting Rights Act.

One of the plaintiffs, St. Paul City Council member Dai Thao, was running for mayor in 2017 when he was arrested for helping a neighbor, a Hmong woman who had trouble seeing, cast her ballot. He was later acquitted.

"Voting is a fundamental right in our democracy, and it's disgraceful that state law makes it more difficult to vote for people who have a disability, cannot read or write, or face language barriers," ACLU attorney David McKinney said in a statement.

The Twin Cities has the nation's largest Hmong population. In addition, about 11 percent of Minnesotans have a disability, according to the ACLU.


Read More

Man wearing Trump hat watches Trump on TV

Trump’s 10-to-1 rule aims to cut red tape, but fewer regulations can mean weaker food safety, Head Start services, and checks on presidential power.

Wu Xiaoling/Xinhua via Getty Images

Trump’s 10-to-1 Rule Gives the Presidency Too Much Power

We only think about the plumbing in our homes when something goes wrong. The same is true for government bureaucracy. Rules, procedures, and bureaucrats operate largely out of sight, making sure food is safe, Social Security checks arrive, workplaces are safe, and children with disabilities receive the services promised to them by law. Yes, there is plenty of red tape in government, just as an old house can accumulate pipes that no longer serve much purpose. But ripping out pipes simply because there are too many of them is not much of a plumbing strategy. Yet the Trump administration has made the number of federal regulations it eliminates a measure of success. That raises a more important question: When does cutting bureaucracy stop making government more efficient and start making it less capable?

1. The Case for Cutting Red Tape

Keep ReadingShow less
US Capitol building
white dome building near body of water during daytime
Photo by José Matute on Unsplash

We The People

On November 19, 1863, President Abraham Lincoln concluded the Gettysburg Address with a vision of democracy that has endured for more than a century:

“That this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom, and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.”

Keep ReadingShow less
The U.S. Capitol in autumn.

New surveys of nearly 20,000 battleground voters find bipartisan majorities say Congress ignores the public, and that more public influence would help.

Philip Yabut/Getty Images

Americans Say the People Can Lead Congress to Common Ground; It Appears They Are Right

New surveys in battleground states and districts across the country, as well as nationwide, find that Americans—both Republicans and Democrats—believe Congress does what most Americans would do less than half the time.

They also found that majorities agree that if Congress were to be more influenced by the people, it would be more likely to find common ground. In fact, surveys show that majorities of Republicans and Democrats agree on what to do about many issues that Congress is stuck on.

Keep ReadingShow less