Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

In Illinois, coronavirus kills year's last plausible redistricting reform vote

Illinois Capitol

Due to the coronavirus, Illinois lawmakers won't reconvene in time to consider redistricting reform legislation.

benkrut/Getty Images

Opponents of partisan gerrymandering have been fighting uphill for years to make Illinois one of the biggest blue states to take mapmaking authority away from politicians. Now the coronavirus has doomed the latest such effort.

The General Assembly has been in recess since last month because of the pandemic and now says it won't reconvene before Tuesday — two days after the deadline for completing legislation in time to permit voters to decide in November whether to create an independent redistricting commission.

This year is the last chance to reassign line-drawing power before another decade passes. That's because, after the census details come in, congressional and legislative maps for the remainder of the 2020s are supposed to be completed in time for the next election.


Virginia is for now the only state with a redistricting commission proposal on the ballot. Approval, which seems likely, would mean at least some maps in 14 states are next drawn by panels where neither party has the ability to perpetuate its hold on power.

The cause of getting such a referendum on the Illinois ballot was a longshot, given resistance by the Democrats in charge in Springfield. But in light of the Covid-19 outbreak it emerged as potentially the only other possible place for a statewide vote in time.

The reason is the measure's fate was in the hands of legislators who might have been swayed at the last minute. But petition drives would need to succeed in the five other states where signatures were being gathered: Arkansas, Nebraska, Nevada, Oklahoma and Oregon. And signature gathering has been stopped cold by a pandemic that is keeping the vast majority of Americans at home.

In Illinois, good-government groups have been pushing independent commission plans throughout the decade. A proposal for a statewide vote got close in 2016 but was blocked by the state Supreme Court on the grounds the proposed language did not meet strict legal requirements.

Proponents thought their chances would improve significantly once Democrat J.B. Pritzker became governor last year, because as a candidate he expressed support for removing legislators from the mapmaking process. But he has not put his weight behind that idea since taking office, instead vowing only to veto maps drawn by the General Assembly next year if he concludes they are overly partisan.

Putting a state constitutional amendment before the voters would require his signature along with three-fifths majorities in both the state House and state Senate. And with Democratic supermajorities in both, the party had little incentive to give up its ability to draw lines that would perpetuate its power.

As evidence of how successful the party's cartographic skills last time have worked out, Democrats took about 60 percent of the statewide vote for both the General Assembly and Congress in 2018 — but their candidates won twice as many legislative races as Republicans along with 13 of the 18 House seats.

A February poll found 82 percent of Democrats and 68 percent of Republicans in the state support an independent redistricting commission, with more than three-quarters of voters in Chicago, its suburbs and the rest of northern Illinois backing the idea along with a somewhat less lopsided majority downstate.

Known by supporters as the Fair Maps Amendment, the current proposal would create a 17-person panel — seven Democrats, seven Republicans and three politically unaffiliated members — appointed by the state's chief justice and the most senior Supreme Court justice of the other party. Any maps would have to win support from 11 commissioners.

As an alternative, good government groups are pondering the idea of pushing legislators to pass legislation that would create a similar commission but put final approval of its work in the hands of the General Assembly.

Read More

Jolt Initiative Hits Back at Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton in Fight Over Voter Registration

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, who is running for U.S. Senate, speaks at an event in Lubbock on Oct 7, 2025. Paxton is seeking to shut down Jolt Initiative, a civic engagement group for Latinos, alleging that it's involved in illegal voter registration efforts. The group is fighting back.

Trace Thomas for The Texas Tribune

Jolt Initiative Hits Back at Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton in Fight Over Voter Registration

Jolt Initiative, a nonprofit that aims to increase civic participation among Latinos, is suing Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton to block his efforts to shut the organization down.

Paxton announced Monday that he was seeking to revoke the nonprofit’s charter, alleging that it had orchestrated “a systematic, unlawful voter registration scheme.”

Keep ReadingShow less
Jolt Initiative Hits Back at Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton in Fight Over Voter Registration

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, who is running for U.S. Senate, speaks at an event in Lubbock on Oct 7, 2025. Paxton is seeking to shut down Jolt Initiative, a civic engagement group for Latinos, alleging that it's involved in illegal voter registration efforts. The group is fighting back.

Trace Thomas for The Texas Tribune

Jolt Initiative Hits Back at Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton in Fight Over Voter Registration

Jolt Initiative, a nonprofit that aims to increase civic participation among Latinos, is suing Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton to block his efforts to shut the organization down.

Paxton announced Monday that he was seeking to revoke the nonprofit’s charter, alleging that it had orchestrated “a systematic, unlawful voter registration scheme.”

Keep ReadingShow less
MAGA Gerrymandering, Pardons, Executive Actions Signal Heightened 2026 Voting Rights Threats

A deep dive into ongoing threats to U.S. democracy—from MAGA election interference and state voting restrictions to filibuster risks—as America approaches 2026 and 2028.

Getty Images, SDI Productions

MAGA Gerrymandering, Pardons, Executive Actions Signal Heightened 2026 Voting Rights Threats

Tuesday, November 4, demonstrated again that Americans want democracy and US elections are conducted credibly. Voter turnout was strong; there were few administrative glitches, but voters’ choices were honored.

The relatively smooth elections across the country nonetheless took place despite electiondenial and anti-voting efforts continuing through election day. These efforts will likely intensify as we move toward the 2026 midterms and 2028 presidential election. The MAGA drive for unprecedented mid-decade, extreme political gerrymandering of congressional districts to guarantee their control of the House of Representatives is a conspicuous thrust of their campaign to remain in power at all costs.

Keep ReadingShow less
A person putting on an "I Voted" sticker.

Major redistricting cases in Louisiana and Texas threaten the Voting Rights Act and the representation of Black and Latino voters across the South.

Getty Images, kali9

The Voting Rights Act Is Under Attack in the South

Under court order, Louisiana redrew to create a second majority-Black district—one that finally gave true representation to the community where my family lives. But now, that district—and the entire Voting Rights Act (VRA)—are under attack. Meanwhile, here in Texas, Republican lawmakers rammed through a mid-decade redistricting plan that dramatically reduces Black and Latino voting power in Congress. As a Louisiana-born Texan, it’s disheartening to see that my rights to representation as a Black voter in Texas, and those of my family back home in Louisiana, are at serious risk.

Two major redistricting cases in these neighboring states—Louisiana v. Callais and Texas’s statewide redistricting challenge, LULAC v. Abbott—are testing the strength and future of the VRA. In Louisiana, the Supreme Court is being asked to decide not just whether Louisiana must draw a majority-Black district to comply with Section 2 of the VRA, but whether considering race as one factor to address proven racial discrimination in electoral maps can itself be treated as discriminatory. It’s an argument that contradicts the purpose of the VRA: to ensure all people, regardless of race, have an equal opportunity to elect candidates amid ongoing discrimination and suppression of Black and Latino voters—to protect Black and Brown voters from dilution.

Keep ReadingShow less