Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

New York City allowed to move ahead with its first ranked-choice election

New York City
Gary Hershorn/Getty Images

New York City can move forward with its debut of ranked elections in seven weeks, because a state judge has turned back arguments the system would effectively disenfranchise minority voters.

The nation's biggest city has become the most populous and prominent place in the nation to embrace ranked-choice voting, an alternative election system hailed in the democracy reform world as a topflight way to combat polarization in governance.

Six members of the City Council's Black, Latino and Asian Caucus and other community organizations sued this month to delay its implementation, arguing election officials do not have enough time to ready the switch and educate voters about the new system. But with three-quarters of voters having approved RCV a year ago, supporters labeled that an attempt to subvert the will of the people.


State Supreme Court Justice Carol Edmead did not go that far Wednesday. Instead, she ruled a delay could disenfranchise military voters, whose ballots are scheduled to be mailed Friday for a Feb. 2 special election to fill a vacant council seat in Queens.

"This court is disinclined to take any action that may result in the disenfranchisement of even one voter or take any action that may result in even one voter's ballot being nullified," she wrote in her three-page ruling.

Under the new system, New Yorkers may rank up to five candidates in order of preference in primaries and special elections. If no candidate wins outright by securing a majority of top-choice votes, an instant runoff takes place. The person listed No. 1 on the fewest ballots is eliminated, and the second-choice votes on those ballots are counted instead. The process continues until one person emerges with a majority of support.

But as the debut draws near, opponents have raised concerns that election officials are far from ready and that people in minority communities will be especially harmed. City Council critics point to an array of Board of Elections mishaps this year, including ballot delivery delays, erroneous ballot envelope mailings and long lines at polling places.

The elections board plans to start its public education campaign and training of poll workers in two weeks. RCV advocacy groups are also helping to inform voters about the new system.

While it's likely the judge's ruling will be appealed, supporters of ranked-choice voting are still celebrating this win. They see the new system as boosting overall turnout and bolstering the chances of nonwhite candidates.

The main event for RCV next year will be the city's Democratic mayoral primary in June, which will be tantamount to picking a successor to the term-limited incumbent, Bill DeBlasio. More than a dozen people are expected to join the field, and the new system will assure none of them gets the nod with a small share of the vote. Still, at least two of the most prominent candidates, Brooklyn Borough President Eric Adams and Black business executive Ray McGuire, have become critics of RCV in recent weeks — arguing it has the potential to suppress the Black and Latino vote. Tech entrepreneur Andrew Yang, who has signaled he plans to run for mayor, endorsed ranked-choice voting while seeking the Democratic presidential nomination in 2020.

Read More

​DCF Commissioner Jodi Hill-Lilly.

DCF Commissioner Jodi Hill-Lilly speaks to the gathering at an adoption ceremony in Torrington.

Laura Tillman / CT Mirror

What’s Behind the Smiles on National Adoption Day

In the past 21 years, I’ve fostered and adopted children with complex medical and developmental needs. Last year, after a grueling 2,205 days navigating the DCF system, we adopted our 7yo daughter. This year, we were the last family on the docket for National Adoption Day after 589 days of suspense. While my 2 yo daughter’s adoption was a moment of triumph, the cold, empty courtroom symbolized the system’s detachment from the lived experiences of marginalized families.

National Adoption Day often serves as a time to highlight stories of joy and family unification. Yet, behind the scenes, the obstacles faced by children in foster care and the families that support them tell a more complex story—one that demands attention and action. For those of us who have navigated the foster care system as caregivers, the systemic indifference and disparities experienced by marginalized children and families, particularly within BIPOC and disability communities, remain glaringly unresolved.

Keep Reading Show less
Framing "Freedom"

hands holding a sign that reads "FREEDOM"

Photo Credit: gpointstudio

Framing "Freedom"

The idea of “freedom” is important to Americans. It’s a value that resonates with a lot of people, and consistently ranks among the most important. It’s a uniquely powerful motivator, with broad appeal across the political spectrum. No wonder, then, that we as communicators often appeal to the value of freedom when making a case for change.

But too often, I see people understand values as magic words that can be dropped into our communications and work exactly the way we want them to. Don’t get me wrong: “freedom” is a powerful word. But simply mentioning freedom doesn’t automatically lead everyone to support the policies we want or behave the way we’d like.

Keep Reading Show less
Hands resting on another.

Amid headlines about Epstein, survivors’ voices remain overlooked. This piece explores how restorative justice offers CSA survivors healing and choice.

Getty Images, PeopleImages

What Do Epstein’s Victims Need?

Jeffrey Epstein is all over the news, along with anyone who may have known about, enabled, or participated in his systematic child sexual abuse. Yet there is significantly less information and coverage on the perspectives, stories and named needs of these survivors themselves. This is almost always the case for any type of coverage on incidences of sexual violence – we first ask “how should we punish the offender?”, before ever asking “what does the survivor want?” For way too long, survivors of sexual violence, particularly of childhood sexual abuse (CSA), have been cast to the wayside, treated like witnesses to crimes committed against the state, rather than the victims of individuals that have caused them enormous harm. This de-emphasis on direct survivors of CSA is often presented as a form of “protection” or “respect for their privacy” and while keeping survivors safe is of the utmost importance, so is the centering and meeting of their needs, even when doing so means going against the grain of what the general public or criminal legal system think are conventional or acceptable responses to violence. Restorative justice (RJ) is one of those “unconventional” responses to CSA and yet there is a growing number of survivors who are naming it as a form of meeting their needs for justice and accountability. But what is restorative justice and why would a CSA survivor ever want it?

“You’re the most powerful person I’ve ever known and you did not deserve what I did to you.” These words were spoken toward the end of a “victim offender dialogue”, a restorative justice process in which an adult survivor of childhood sexual abuse had elected to meet face-to-face for a facilitated conversation with the person that had harmed her. This phrase was said by the man who had violently sexually abused her in her youth, as he sat directly across from her, now an adult woman. As these two people looked at each other at that moment, the shift in power became tangible, as did a dissolvement of shame in both parties. Despite having gone through a formal court process, this survivor needed more…more space to ask questions, to name the impacts this violence had and continues to have in her life, to speak her truth directly to the person that had harmed her more than anyone else, and to reclaim her power. We often talk about the effects of restorative justice in the abstract, generally ineffable and far too personal to be classifiable; but in that instant, it was a felt sense, it was a moment of undeniable healing for all those involved and a form of justice and accountability that this survivor had sought for a long time, yet had not received until that instance.

Keep Reading Show less
The Great Political Finger Trap

Protesters gather near the White House on November 24, 2025 in Washington, DC. The group Refuse Fascism held a rally and afterwards held hands in a long line holding yellow "Crime Scene Do Not Cross" tape along Lafayette Square near the White House.

(Photo by Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)

The Great Political Finger Trap

In the wake of Charlie Kirk’s assassination earlier this year, a YouGov poll was released exploring sentiments around political violence. The responses raised some alarm, with 25% of those who self-identified as “very liberal,” and nearly 20% of those polled between the ages of 18 and 29, saying that violence was sometimes justified “in order to achieve political goals.” Numerous commentators, including many within the bridging space, lamented the loss of civility and the straying from democratic ideals. Others pointed to ends justifying means, to cases of injustice and incivility so egregious, as they saw it, that it simply demanded an extreme response.

But amidst this heated debate over what is justified in seeking political ends, another question is often overlooked: do the extreme measures work? Or, do acts of escalation lead to a cycle of greater escalation, deepening divisions, and making our crises harder to resolve, and ultimately undermining the political ends they seek?

Keep Reading Show less