Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Partisan gerrymandering's first win of the year goes to N.Y. Democrats

New York's Capitol in Albany

If approved, a ballot measure would allow Democrats in the New York legislature to ram through a partisan redistricting plan.

demerzel21/Getty Images

Voters across New York will decide this fall whether to take some of the few teeth out of a new system designed to make redistricting of the nation's fourth largest state a bit less partisan.

The ballot measure was quietly given final approval last week by a Democratic-controlled Legislature voting almost entirely along party lines, the first victory this year by politicians out to make the most of their mapmaking powers.

The vote reminds democracy reformers they made only marginal gains in their bid to curtail partisan gerrymandering in time for the redrawing of all the nation's electoral boundaries for this decade.


Assuming approval in November's low-turnout, off-year election, the measure will allow the Democrats in Albany to unilaterally accept or reject the handiwork of an independent but only advisory redistricting commission that next January is supposed to draw maps for the first time. When creating the commission seven years ago, the divided state government established rules to give either party a reasonable shot at legislative veto power over the lines.

Abandoning that feature will assure New York remains the biggest state where the Democrats can leverage their partisan advantage. That's because California is one of only eight states that will rely on truly independent commissions to make the maps, while in Texas and Florida the process is under Republican control — the situation, for a second straight decade, in a solid plurality of states.

New York Democrats are keen not only to preserve their control of the Legislature but also to keep dominating the congressional delegation. They hold 19 of the 27 House seats now but at least one and maybe two districts will soon have to disappear, depending on the reapportionment that follows the census, which will be finalized in the coming weeks.

The current map was decreed in 2012 by a panel of federal judges after the Legislature deadlocked. In a bid to prevent that from happening again, the lawmakers put a referendum on the ballot two years later creating a panel of 10, with two seats reserved for political independents, that will take the first shot at setting legislative and congressional boundaries.

The measure, approved with 57 percent support, said that if the Legislature is under one party's control then a two-thirds supermajority would be needed to approve the maps — essentially assuring the lines would require some GOP buy-in. The new referendum would reduce that threshold to a simple majority, putting the Democrats in total control at least in 2022.

If they decided to reject both the first and second proposals from the commission, they would effectively claim all the cartographic power for themselves.


Read More

The Word ‘Black’ Has Disappeared From a Set of Bills Aimed at Addressing Black Maternal Health

The Momnibus Act was previously known as the Black Maternal Health Momnibus Act, but the word 'Black' has been removed from the title and appears only once across the latest package.

Emily Scherer for The 19th

The Word ‘Black’ Has Disappeared From a Set of Bills Aimed at Addressing Black Maternal Health

The word “Black” has been almost completely removed from a package of bills that have long been viewed as Congress’ main legislative vehicle to address the Black maternal health crisis, frustrating some advocates who feel Black women are being erased from the policy.

The key change this year is the title. The Momnibus Act — filed in mid-March — was called the Black Maternal Health Momnibus Act in 2023; before that it was the Black Maternal Health Momnibus Act of 2021 and the Black Maternal Health Momnibus Act of 2020. None of the previous packages, which were championed by Democrats, have been enacted.

Keep ReadingShow less
Trump Never Intended To Be Just

U.S. President Donald Trump on May 22, 2026 in Suffern, New York.

(Photo by Roberto Schmidt/Getty Images)

Trump Never Intended To Be Just

Let us set aside, for a moment, the fact that in suing the IRS, Donald Trump initiated a lawsuit that was meritless, frivolous, and a blatant conflict of interest…in his own words, “I am supposed to work out a settlement with myself.” Let us further acknowledge, but look past the fact, that the settlement is filled with “illegal cookies” like his effort to exempt himself and his family members or family-controlled companies, from past or future IRS audits or any future obligations to ever pay federal taxes.

Please appreciate, but set aside for a moment, that this is the most corrupt administration in modern US history. Further, I would like to ignore the fact that this appears to be an effort to finance a private militia that has violently sought to undermine the US Government and the electoral capacity of the vote of the people of the United States of America.

Keep ReadingShow less
The Fragile Promise of the Ballot
black and white love print crew neck shirt
Photo by Cyrus Crossan on Unsplash

The Fragile Promise of the Ballot

Recent Supreme Court decisions such as Shelby County v. Holder and Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee were not just redefinitions of election law; they marked a critical shift away from the federal government’s duty to ensure equal ballot access—a duty fundamental to democracy.

The consequences were swift and broad. Within hours, Shelby County, Texas, imposed strict voter ID rules that federal officials had previously blocked under the Voting Rights Act’s pre-clearance provisions. Soon after, North Carolina reduced early voting and eliminated same-day registration. Across parts of Alabama, Georgia, and other Southern states, polling places closed or moved, often in communities with large Black populations. What once required federal review could now proceed quickly.

Keep ReadingShow less