Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Minnesota's limits on voter assistance are illegal, latest suit says

older voters

The lawsuit claims the limits violate the Voting Rights Act.

Sara D. Davis/Getty Images

Minnesota's limit on the amount of help one person may give to others in casting their ballots violates federal law and the state's constitution, the latest Democratic voting rights lawsuit alleges.

The litigation was announced Thursday by the party's House and Senate campaign committees. They filed it last week against the state's top elections official, Secretary of State Steve Simon, a fellow Democrat.

The suit joins more than a dozen others already filed in the early stages of the 2020 campaign by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, part of an eight-figure attack on state laws they view as attempts to suppress turnout by black people and other minorities or to give Republicans some other political advantage.


Almost all the cases have been brought in places that are presidential tossups or have several hot congressional races In November.

While the Democratic nominee has carried Minnesota in every White House contest since 1976, President Trump came within 2 points (45,000 votes) of winning there last time and has vowed to contest it harder this fall.

The new suit is the second the Democrats have brought in the state. Last fall they sued in federal court challenging a Minnesota law that dictates the order of candidates on the ballot be the reverse of the results of the previous election. That means candidates of the Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party (as its uniquely known in the state) will be listed last this November, which the party argues puts it at a disadvantage.

The Minnesota law challenged by the newest suit states that a person may help no more than three voters complete in-person or absentee ballots. The intent of the law is to prevent efforts to manipulate the votes of elderly, disabled and non-English-speaking voters.

But the lawsuit says the statute directly violates the federal Voting Rights Act requiring that any voter needing assistance has the right to choose whomever they want as a helper. The Democrats also maintain the law presents a burden on the right to vote under the Minnesota Constitution.

Last year, Simon conceded at a state legislative hearing that the limit on helpers may not survive a legal challenge.

The suit argues the law places a particular burden on the large communities of Somalis and Hmong people from Southeast Asia who have settled in Minnesota.

"We should be working to increase access to the ballot, not restrict it," said Rep. Cheri Bustos of Illinois, the DCCC chairwoman.

Her group and its Senate counterpart, which recruit and help finance congressional candidates, have pledged to spend more than $10 million on their lawsuit strategy, which has so far been pressed in eight states: Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Michigan, Minnesota, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Texas. They have already scored a handful of wins, most recently when South Carolina officials agreed this week to drop a requirement that complete Social Security numbers be provided on voter registration forms.

Read More

“It’s Probably as Bad as It Can Get”:
A Conversation with Lilliana Mason

Liliana Mason

“It’s Probably as Bad as It Can Get”: A Conversation with Lilliana Mason

In the aftermath of the killing of conservative activist Charlie Kirk, the threat of political violence has become a topic of urgent concern in the United States. While public support for political violence remains low—according to Sean Westwood of the Polarization Research Lab, fewer than 2 percent of Americans believe that political murder is acceptable—even isolated incidence of political violence can have a corrosive effect.

According to political scientist Lilliana Mason, political violence amounts to a rejection of democracy. “If a person has used violence to achieve a political goal, then they’ve given up on the democratic process,” says Mason, “Instead, they’re trying to use force to affect government.”

Keep ReadingShow less
We Need To Rethink the Way We Prevent Sexual Violence Against Children

We Need To Rethink the Way We Prevent Sexual Violence Against Children

November 20 marks World Children’s Day, marking the adoption of the United Nations’ Convention on the Rights of the Child. While great strides have been made in many areas, we are failing one of the declaration’s key provisions: to “protect the child from all forms of sexual exploitation and sexual abuse.”

Sexual violence against children is a public health crisis that keeps escalating, thanks in no small part to the internet, with hundreds of millions of children falling victim to online sexual violence annually. Addressing sexual violence against children only once it materializes is not enough, nor does it respect the rights of the child to be protected from violence. We need to reframe the way we think about child protection and start preventing sexual violence against children holistically.

Keep ReadingShow less
People waving US flags

A deep look at what “American values” truly mean, contrasting liberal, conservative, and MAGA interpretations through the lens of the Declaration and Constitution.

LeoPatrizi/Getty Images

What Are American Values?

There are fundamental differences between liberals and conservatives—and certainly MAGA adherents—on what are “American values.”

But for both liberal and conservative pundits, the term connotes something larger than us, grounding, permanent—of lasting meaning. Because the values of people change as the times change, as the culture changes, and as the political temperament changes. The results of current polls are the values of the moment, not "American values."

Keep ReadingShow less
Voting Rights Are Back on Trial...Again

Vote here sign

Caitlin Wilson/AFP via Getty Images

Voting Rights Are Back on Trial...Again

Last month, one of the most consequential cases before the Supreme Court began. Six white Justices, two Black and one Latina took the bench for arguments in Louisiana v. Callais. Addressing a core principle of the Voting Rights Act of 1965: representation. The Court is asked to consider if prohibiting the creation of voting districts that intentionally dilute Black and Brown voting power in turn violates the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th and 15th Amendments.

For some, it may be difficult to believe that we’re revisiting this question in 2025. But in truth, the path to voting has been complex since the founding of this country; especially when you template race over the ballot box. America has grappled with the voting question since the end of the Civil War. Through amendments, Congress dropped the term “property” when describing millions of Black Americans now freed from their plantation; then later clarified that we were not only human beings but also Americans before realizing the right to vote could not be assumed in this country. Still, nearly a century would pass before President Lyndon B Johnson signed the Voting Rights Act of 1965 ensuring voting was accessible, free and fair.

Keep ReadingShow less