Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Tribes secure big voting rights win as North Dakota backs down

Standing Rock Sioux Reservation

An address requirement in North Dakota has disenfranchised thousands of people living on reservations, including the Standing Rock Sioux, who were a party to the lawsuit.

Scott Olson/Getty Images

North Dakota has agreed to a significant expansion of voting rights for Native Americans.

Residents of reservations will be able to register and vote this year even if they don't comply with the state's restrictive voter identification law, which requires voters to have an ID with a residential address, under an agreement announced late Thursday.

The deal marks a significant and stunningly sudden victory for the American Indian electorate. It settles the latest lawsuit brought by tribes and voters, who have been arguing for four years that the law is unconstitutional. North Dakota agreed to the settlement only hours after a federal judge rejected the state's bid to get the case dismissed and set a trial date for May.


The address requirement has disenfranchised thousands of people living on reservations, because the state does not assign street numbers to their homes.

The state has maintained the rule was designed to deter voting fraud, but Native Americans see it as a straightforward bid to suppress their reliably Democratic vote.

The Republican Legislature imposed the restriction seven years ago, months after Democrat Heidi Heitkamp was elected to the Senate in an upset aided by strong support from Native Americans. With the new law in place, she lost two years ago, and every current statewide elected official who identifies with a party, including all three members of Congress, are Republicans.

Native Americans constitute about 5 percent of the state's population, making them a crucial voting bloc in close contests. Different tribes have been challenging the law in federal court for almost four years.

Under the new consent decree, the secretary of state has promised to ensure Native Americans may vote if they do not have a street address or don't know what it is. (Some buildings on reservations have formal addresses but no signage, and almost all residents rely on post office boxes and have those numbers on their tribal IDs.)

The settlement requires the state to inform voters and poll workers of the changes. And for this fall, it will allow people at the polls to vote after marking their homes on a map, which the state must then use to generate a physical address — which, in turn, can be made part of future tribal ID cards.

A similar system was used on some reservations on Election Day 2018, after the ID law survived an earlier court challenge, and tribal officials issued handwritten identification cards to people when they arrived at polling places and pointed to their residences on a map.

Secretary of State Al Jaeger, an independent, also agreed to work with the state Transportation Department to issue free IDs on every reservation at least a month before each statewide election, and to press the Legislature to reimburse tribal governments $5,000 before each election for the administrative costs of coming up with addresses and IDs.

The agreement was detailed by the Campaign Legal Center, which presses an array of litigation to promote ballot access and rein in money's influence on politics, and the Native American Rights Fund. They represented the Spirit Lake Nation and Standing Rock Sioux, two of the most prominent tribes in North Dakota, and six Native Americans who were also plaintiffs.


Read More

Gavin Newsom, Ben Shapiro, and Donald Trump Finally Agree on a Major Voting Rights Issue
Image: IVN staff

Gavin Newsom, Ben Shapiro, and Donald Trump Finally Agree on a Major Voting Rights Issue

If you asked Gavin Newsom, Ben Shapiro, or Donald Trump whether they put voters first, all three would say yes.

They would say it confidently.

Keep Reading Show less
Someone tipping the scales of justice.

Retaliatory prosecutions and political score-settling mark a grave threat to the rule of law, constitutional rights, and democratic accountability.

Getty Images, sommart

White House ‘Score‑Settling’ Raises Fears of a Weaponized Government

The recent casual acknowledgement by the White House Chief of Staff that the President is engaged in prosecutorial “score settling” marks a dangerous departure from the rule-of-law norms that restrain executive power in a constitutional democracy. This admission that the State is using its legal authority to punish perceived enemies is antithetical to core Constitutional principles and the rule of law.

The American experiment was built on the rejection of personal rule and political revenge, replacing it with laws that bind even those who hold the highest offices. In 1776, Thomas Paine wrote, “For as in absolute governments the King is law, so in free countries the law ought to be King; and there ought to be no other.” The essence of these words can be found in our Constitution that deliberately placed power in the hands of three co-equal branches of government–Legislative, Executive, and Judicial.

Keep Reading Show less
Crumpled dollar bills, two coins, a wallet, book, glasses, and home phone on a table.

A new economic study shows tariffs are paid overwhelmingly by American consumers, exposing trade policy as a hidden domestic tax.

Getty Images, David Harrigan

The Tariff Receipt Americans Can No Longer Afford

For years, the American public has been told that tariffs are a sophisticated form of tribute, a way to extract wealth from foreign adversaries while shielding the domestic worker. It is a seductive narrative, painted in the bold strokes of nationalistic pride. But as a rigorous new study from the Kiel Institute for the World Economy confirms, the reality is far less heroic. The bill for these trade barriers is not being mailed to Beijing, New Delhi, or Brussels. It is being delivered, with startling efficiency, to the kitchen tables of the American family.

The findings are as clear as they are sobering. After analyzing more than 25 million shipment records totaling nearly 4 trillion dollars, researchers found that American importers and consumers have shouldered 96 percent of the cost of recent tariffs. Foreign exporters, by contrast, have felt a mere 4 percent of the sting. Despite the robust rhetoric emanating from the White House, the data suggests that tariffs function not as a foreign levy but as a domestic consumption tax. The government may have collected 200 billion dollars in customs revenue in 2025, but that money was extracted almost entirely from the pockets of the people it was ostensibly meant to protect.

Keep Reading Show less