Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Progressives launch bid for Ohio vote on easing access to the polls

voter in booth

Ohioans for Secure and Fair Elections needs to collect 443,000 signatures to get the referendum on the ballot in November.

Justin Merriman/Getty Images

Progressive groups in Ohio formally launched their effort Wednesday to put before the voters an amendment to the state constitution making voting easier on several fronts.

If ultimately successful, the package would be counted on to boost turnout in one of the nation's most populous political bellwethers starting in 2022.

But first, a coalition of mostly left-leaning groups called Ohioans for Secure and Fair Elections, spearheaded by the state's branch of the American Civil Liberties Union, must collect 443,000 valid signatures by July on a petition asking for the referendum.


Approval by the voters in November would add Ohio to the roster 16 states where eligible residents are automatically registered to vote, unless they ask to opt out, whenever they get a driver's license or otherwise do business with the motor vehicle bureau. Most states with so-called AVR are reliably Democratic and only two, Colorado and Michigan, are regularly competitive in presidential elections. (Ohio has famously been carried by the winner every time since 1964.)

The measure would also permit voters to register and cast ballots at polling locations during early voting and on Election Day, similar to the laws on the books in 21 states. And it would enshrine four weeks of in-person early voting in the state constitution. That's state law now, but in 2014 the Republicans in charge in Columbus reduced the time from five weeks.

"In the process of building a non-partisan, broadly representative buckeye coalition, we've had ongoing conversations with Ohio veterans, faith-based groups, members of the disability rights community, advocacy and legal organizations," said ACLU of Ohio Executive Director J. Bennett Guess. "And the consensus is clear: it's time to remove unnecessary barriers to the ballot and make sure that our elections are secure and fair, ensuring all eligible voters are heard and our democracy is strengthened."


Read More

U.S. Rep. David Valadao (R-CA)

U.S. Rep. David Valadao (R-CA) at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, DC. House Republicans

(Photo by Joe Raedle/Getty Images)

Democrats Gerrymandered David Valadao’s District. Did It Backfire?

GOP US Rep. David Valadao has never won his seat in Congress on Republican votes alone because too few Republicans live in the district where he was raised, lives, and runs his family farm.

- YouTube youtu.be

Keep ReadingShow less
​U.S. standard certificate of live birth application form next to flag of USA.

U.S. standard certificate of live birth application form next to flag of USA.

Getty Images

Birthright Citizenship Explained: History, SCOTUS Rulings & Executive Orders

Birthright citizenship has been part of American law for more than 150 years. As the American public continues to see challenges against its constitutionality, brought on by the Trump administration, it is important to remember why.

After the Civil War, Congress adopted the 14th Amendment in 1868 to overturn Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857), which had denied citizenship to Black Americans, dampening their federal protections. While the 13th amendment had abolished slavery a few years earlier, Free Black Americans were considered noncitizens by many, and thus had to work around a separate set of laws, meaning they could never be fully integrated as members of American society. In response to this issue, the 14th Amendment declares that all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to its jurisdiction, are citizens of the United States.

Keep ReadingShow less
Scales of justice
a golden scale with an eagle on top of it

A Real Test for “Lawfare” Must Protect Allies and Enemies Alike

“Lawfare” is becoming a word that ends arguments instead of clarifying them. When Donald Trump or his allies are prosecuted, many on the right call the case political. When the Trump administration investigates critics, many on the left call it retaliation or “score-settling.” Sometimes those accusations are justified. Sometimes they are partisan reflexes. A label that changes with the identity of the defendant is not a rule of law.

The hard cases are not the ones with a public order to punish an enemy. They are cases with mixed facts: a real investigative predicate, a politically active target, disputed timing, later changes in treatment, and no contemporaneous record the public can inspect. Those cases require something better than “trust the prosecutors” or “trust the accused.” They require an auditable standard.

Keep ReadingShow less