Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

The 11 states that would face federal oversight under a new Voting Rights Act

States that would require preclearance under proposal for new Voting Rights Act
Source: Institute for Southern Studies

A growing chorus of congressional Democrats are saying that enacting a new Voting Rights Act is the best way for Congress to honor John Lewis, the civil rights icon and veteran Atlanta congressman who died last week.

The Republicans running the Senate have signaled no interest in debating the bill, designed to revive the racial discrimination protections enshrined in the original 1965 landmark law. The Democratic House passed the measure in December, with Lewis wielding the gavel during the vote.

Many of his colleagues now say the measure should be dubbed the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Act. There's talk of pushing it through the House a second time this summer, perhaps with election assistance aid to the states tacked on.


The legislation is a response to the Supreme Court's 2013 decision invalidating a central provision of the law, which then required places with histories of discrimination to get Justice Department permission for any changes to election laws or processes. Nine states and parts of five others were subject to such "preclearance" at the time, but the court said the formula for deciding which jurisdictions made the list was unconstitutionally outdated.

Since that ruling, in Shelby County v. Holder, almost every one of those places has tightened voting rules.

Under the updated formula now stuck in Congress, the four most populous states would be subject to preclearance along with seven others, according to analysts at the Institute for Southern Studies, a progressive policy group:

  • Alabama
  • California
  • Florida
  • Georgia
  • Louisiana
  • Mississippi
  • New York
  • North Carolina
  • South Carolina
  • Texas
  • Virginia

Read More

A nurse giving a patient a shot.

A pregnant woman receives a COVID-19 vaccine at a pharmacy in Pennsylvania in 2021. Hannah Beier/Reuters.

Hannah Beier/Reuters

Amid Confusing CDC Guidance About Vaccines, Study Highlights New Risk of COVID-19 During Pregnancy

In the first 18 months of the COVID-19 pandemic, tens of thousands of pregnant women were wheeled into hospitals where they fought for their lives and the lives of the babies they carried.

It took the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention until August 2021, eight months after the first vaccine was administered, to formally recommend the COVID-19 shot for pregnant and breastfeeding mothers. The CDC had found that pregnant women with COVID-19 faced a 70% increased risk of dying, compared with those who weren’t. They also faced an increased risk of being admitted to the intensive care unit, needing a form of life support reserved for the sickest patients, and delivering a stillborn baby. In recommending the vaccine, the CDC assured them that the shot was safe and did not cause fertility problems.

Keep ReadingShow less
A nurse giving a patient a shot.

A pregnant woman receives a COVID-19 vaccine at a pharmacy in Pennsylvania in 2021. Hannah Beier/Reuters.

Hannah Beier/Reuters

Amid Confusing CDC Guidance About Vaccines, Study Highlights New Risk of COVID-19 During Pregnancy

In the first 18 months of the COVID-19 pandemic, tens of thousands of pregnant women were wheeled into hospitals where they fought for their lives and the lives of the babies they carried.

It took the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention until August 2021, eight months after the first vaccine was administered, to formally recommend the COVID-19 shot for pregnant and breastfeeding mothers. The CDC had found that pregnant women with COVID-19 faced a 70% increased risk of dying, compared with those who weren’t. They also faced an increased risk of being admitted to the intensive care unit, needing a form of life support reserved for the sickest patients, and delivering a stillborn baby. In recommending the vaccine, the CDC assured them that the shot was safe and did not cause fertility problems.

Keep ReadingShow less
Person filling out absentee ballot.

Twenty-six states will elect Secretaries of State in 2026, with key battlegrounds and rising concerns over election deniers shaping the future of U.S. election integrity.

Getty Images, Cavan Images

Why 26 Secretary of State Races in 2026 Could Shape U.S. Election Integrity

The Fulcrum strives to approach news stories with an open mind and skepticism, striving to present our readers with a broad spectrum of viewpoints through diligent research and critical thinking. As best we can, we remove personal bias from our reporting and seek a variety of perspectives in both our news gathering and selection of opinion pieces. However, before our readers can analyze varying viewpoints, they must have the facts.

How many states will be holding elections in November 2026 for Secretary of State:

26 U.S. states will hold elections for Secretary of State. The states are: Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, North Dakota, Ohio, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Vermont, Wisconsin, and Wyoming.

Keep ReadingShow less