Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Mississippi voting rules biased against immigrant citizens, suit alleges

Naturalization ceremony in Mississippi

Naturalized citizens (but not natives) must prove their citizenship when registering to vote in Mississippi. Above, members of the military becoming citizens at Keesler Air Force Base in Biloxi.

Air Force/ Kemberly Groue

The latest effort to ease restrictions on voting through litigation is a challenge to Mississippi's requirement that naturalized citizens show proof of their citizenship when they register.

The lawsuit, filed Monday by the Mississippi Immigrants Rights Alliance, says the law is unconstitutional because it violates of the 14th Amendment's equal protection clause by treating one category of citizens differently from another. People born in the United States need only check a box on the state's registration form attesting they are citizens.

The Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, which helped bring the suit, says Mississippi is the only state with a unique mandate for would-be voters who were not born American citizens.


The law was enacted in 1924, four decades before the Voting Rights Act, and has never been challenged under that statute's prohibition of discriminatory state voting laws.

"This law is grounded in white supremacy, xenophobia and racism and should therefore be abolished," MIRA Executive Director Bill Chandler said in a statement.

His group says the state has about 26,000 naturalized citizens, a 50 percent increase in the past two decades, and most of them are not white. It concedes not all counties have been following the statute, but those that do require the presentation of a naturalization certificate. For voters who have lost the document, a replacement costs $500.

The state already has one of the toughest sets of paperwork requirements for registration:

a Mississippi driver's license, proof of a Social Security number and utility bills proving current residency.

The complaint follows another recent high-profile voting lawsuit filed against Mississippi, challenging another Jim Crow-era law requiring statewide candidates to carry most legislative districts as well as win the overall vote.

Read More

A person in a military uniform holding a gavel.

As the Trump administration redefines “Warrior Ethos,” U.S. military leaders face a crucial test: defend democracy or follow unlawful orders.

Getty Images, Liudmila Chernetska

Warrior Ethos or Rule of Law? The Military’s Defining Moment

Does Secretary Hegseth’s extraordinary summoning of hundreds of U.S. command generals and admirals to a Sept. 30 meeting and the repugnant reinstatement of Medals of Honor to 20 participants in the infamous 1890 Wounded Knee Massacre—in which 300 Lakota Sioux men, women, and children were killed—foreshadow the imposition of a twisted approach to U.S. “Warrior Ethos”? Should military leaders accept an ethos that ignores the rule of law?

Active duty and retired officers must trumpet a resounding: NO, that is not acceptable. And, we civilians must realize the stakes and join them.

Keep ReadingShow less
Yes, They Are Trying To Kill Us
Provided

Yes, They Are Trying To Kill Us

In the rush to “dismantle the administrative state,” some insist that freeing people from “burdensome bureaucracy” will unleash thriving. Will it? Let’s look together.

A century ago, bureaucracy was minimal. The 1920s followed a worldwide pandemic that killed an estimated 17.4–50 million people. While the virus spread, the Great War raged; we can still picture the dehumanizing use of mustard gas and trench warfare. When the war ended, the Roaring Twenties erupted as an antidote to grief. Despite Prohibition, life was a party—until the crash of 1929. The 1930s opened with a global depression, record joblessness, homelessness, and hunger. Despair spread faster than the pandemic had.

Keep ReadingShow less