Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Democrats take on left-leaning New York in latest ballot access lawsuit

New York absentee ballot

New York continues to require an excuse for voters who want to cast absentee ballots.

Newsday LLC/Getty Images

Since the 2020 election, state and federal courts have been inundated with lawsuits over ballot access, recounts, redistricting and other election matters. Generally, they follow a predictable pattern, with partisanship at the heart of the matter.

But Democrats turned the narrative around on Friday, when lawyers for the congressional Democrats’ campaign arm filed a lawsuit against deep blue New York over its absentee ballot practices.

Red states take the brunt of the criticism for their more restrictive rules around ballot access. New York, however, is among the very few liberal states ranked among the places where it is hardest to vote.


Democrats have dominated the New York Assembly for at least two decades and now comfortably control the state Senate after Republicans narrowly held the majority for years. And with a Democrat as governor (Kathy Hochul took over after Andrew Cuomo was forced to resign last year following allegations of sexual harassment), the party would appear aligned with left- and center-left priorities.

But the state has yet to make significant changes to its election practices. Last year, the nonpartisan Center for Innovation & Research studied every state’s rules for absentee and early in-person voting. Only six, primarily right-leaning, states offer neither. New York ranked among one of the nine — again, mostly conservative states — that offer one, but not both of the options.

In November 2021, New York voters had the chance to approve no-excuse absentee ballots through a constitutional amendment but it was voted down, 55 percent to 45 percent.

“New York has tried to make improvements, but until recently, it was very difficult, if not nearly impossible, for voters in the state to vote any way other than in-person on Election Day,” said David Becker, executive director of CEIR. “Mail voting and early voting is somewhat more available to voters now, but New York has tried to implement a huge volume of reforms, and that almost always leads to difficulty. New York is still several steps behind on issues related to voter registration and other areas of election administration as well. The fact remains that it’s far easier to register to vote, and cast a ballot, in most other states than New York, though it’s headed in the right direction.”

In addition to limiting the use of absentee ballots, New York had the third highest rate of absentee ballot rejection (3.6 percent), behind only Arkansas and New Mexico, prompting the lawsuit.

“New York has an unfortunate history of discarding absentee ballots for easily fixable issues that are unrelated to a voter’s eligibility,” wrote Marc Elias, the Democratic election attorney leading the lawsuit. He claims New York is violating the First and 14th amendments as well as the Civil Rights Act.

Elias and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee are challenging four specific rejection practices:

  1. Ballots that could be fixed but not not defined as “curable.”
  2. Ballots that are ruled invalid only because a voter followed improper instructions from election officials.
  3. Ballots that were cast in the wrong jurisdiction.
  4. Ballots that lacked a postmark because the U.S. Postal Service made a mistake.

This isn’t the first time New York has been sued over its absentee ballot rules. In 2020, a group of voting rights organizations filed a lawsuit asking a federal court to force the state to change the absentee ballot verification requirements. According to the Campaign Legal Center, the state had rejected 14 percent of absentee ballots in the 2018 general election.

The plaintiffs settled the lawsuit after the state passed a law enabling voters to cure ballots with certain errors.


Read More

Who’s Responsible When AI Causes Harm?: Unpacking the Federal AI Liability Framework Debate
the letters are made up of different colors

Who’s Responsible When AI Causes Harm?: Unpacking the Federal AI Liability Framework Debate

This nonpartisan policy brief, written by an ACE fellow, is republished by The Fulcrum as part of our partnership with the Alliance for Civic Engagement and our NextGen initiative — elevating student voices, strengthening civic education, and helping readers better understand democracy and public policy.

Key takeaways

  • The U.S. has no national AI liability law. Instead, a patchwork of state laws has emerged which has resulted in legal protections being dependent on where an individual resides.
  • It’s often unclear who is legally responsible when AI causes harm. This gap leaves many people with no clear path to seek help.
  • In March 2026, the White House and Congress introduced major proposals to establish a federal standard, but there is significant disagreement about whether that standard should prioritize protecting innovation or protecting people harmed by AI systems.

Background: A Patchwork of State Laws

Without a national AI law, states have been filling in the gaps on their own. The result is an uneven landscape where a person’s legal protections depend entirely on which state they live in.

Keep ReadingShow less
Stethoscope, pile of hundred dollar bills and a calculator

A deep dive into America’s healthcare cost crisis, comparing reform to a modern “moonshot.” Explores payment models, rising costs, and lessons from John F. Kennedy’s space race vision to drive systemic change.

IronHeart/Getty Images

The Moonshot America Needs to Solve Its Healthcare Crisis

In 1961, President John F. Kennedy told the nation, “We choose to go to the moon.” It’s often remembered as a moment of national ambition. In reality, the United States was locked in a Cold War with the Soviet Union, and the fear of falling behind in technological dominance made the mission unavoidable.

Today’s space race is driven by a different force. Governments and private companies are investing billions to capture economic advantages, from satellite infrastructure to advanced computing to the next frontier of resource extraction.

Keep ReadingShow less
After the Court's Voting Rights Decision - How to Protect Black-Majority Districts
a large white building with columns with United States Supreme Court Building in the background

After the Court's Voting Rights Decision - How to Protect Black-Majority Districts

The Supreme Court recently ruled that Louisiana violated the Constitution in creating a new Black-majority voting district. This was after a Federal court had ruled that the previous map, by packing Blacks all in one district, diluted their votes, which violated the Voting Rights Act.

The question is what impact the decision in Louisiana v Callais will have on §2 of the Voting Rights Act ... and on the current gerrymander contest to gain safe seats in the House. The conservative majority said that the decision left the Act intact. The liberal minority, in a strong dissent by Justice Kagan, said that the practical impact was to "render §2 all but a dead letter," making it likely that existing Black-majority districts will not remain for long.

Keep ReadingShow less