Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Texas and Ohio Push To Close Primaries: The New Gerrymandering Playbook To Lock Out Voters

Closing primaries after gerrymandering isn’t just strategy—it’s a structural threat to representative democracy.

Opinion

A "vote" sticker or pin going into a ballot box.

From Ohio to Texas, lawmakers are trying to close primaries after gerrymandering maps — locking millions out of meaningful elections. Learn why voters are fighting back and where reform is gaining momentum.

Getty Images, Juan Moyano

Amid this year’s unprecedented redistricting wars, another troubling trend is taking shape. In the past week alone, Ohio legislators introduced a bill to close the state’s primaries, while the Texas Republican Party filed a lawsuit to do the same.

This is no accident. In fact, it’s part of a well-worn playbook that goes something like this: First, politicians redraw maps in their states (also known as redistricting or gerrymandering) to lock in safe seats and make general elections uncompetitive. Then, they move to close primaries so that only a narrow slice of voters—typically the most partisan—can meaningfully participate.


The goal is simple: lock in power by locking out voters. If these states and others are successful, even fewer voters will determine most elections in America, leaving the rest of us without a meaningful voice.

A Year of Failed Attempts (So Far)

Before Ohio and Texas, efforts to close primary elections in 16 states this year quietly failed. That’s no surprise—closing primaries is deeply unpopular with voters. According to polling from the Unite America Institute, huge majorities of Republicans, Democrats, and independents believe that every eligible voter should have the freedom to vote in every taxpayer-funded election.

Politicians and groups outside the mainstream are often the driving forces behind these bills, because they view closed primaries as a way they can tilt the playing field. By ensuring that only the most partisan and unrepresentative voters can participate in the only election that matters, these groups’ preferred candidates are more likely to win.

Yet the public knows better—and the trendline shows it. Nationwide, 16 states still hold closed primaries for congressional offices, locking out more than 16.6 million independent voters. But in recent years, momentum has gone in the opposite direction, with voters in Colorado (2016), Alaska (2020), Maine (2021), and most recently New Mexico (2024) all choosing to expand participation.

The Wyoming Playbook

Despite momentum for open primaries, fringe groups clearly see an opportunity. Because in a couple of states recently, their strategy is working.

Take Wyoming, for example. After the legislature passed a law in 2023 to effectively close the state’s primaries, ideologically extreme factions within the Republican Party quickly gained ground. With 94% of state house seats facing no November competition—and the majority of districts where the GOP primary was the only election that mattered—they rapidly expanded their influence and ultimately secured a majority in the state house.

Once in power, they pursued an agenda far out of step with local priorities, from slashing K–12 funding growth to proposing corporate tax holidays even business groups opposed.

This is the playbook now being exported to states like Texas and Ohio.

Gerrymandering and Closed Primaries: A Compound Threat

Redistricting and primary rules may seem like separate issues, but they are structurally linked. When politicians both rig the maps and restrict who gets to vote in primaries, the effect is compounded: most voters are locked out of meaningful participation in both the primary and general election.

In states like Texas, Ohio, and South Carolina—where aggressive redistricting is underway and efforts to close primaries are active—the threat to voter power is especially urgent.

The risk isn’t theoretical. When primaries are closed, unrepresentative candidates are more likely to emerge, isolating the mainstream and distorting representation. Ironically, by narrowing the electorate, parties may even undermine their own general election competitiveness by nominating candidates who are out of step with the broader public.

The Bigger Picture

This trend should alarm anyone who cares about a representative democracy. What we are witnessing is a coordinated effort to reshape the rules of American politics—first through gerrymandering, then through closing primaries.

But here’s the hopeful reality: voters are pushing back. From Colorado to Alaska to Maine to New Mexico, momentum is still on the side of opening primaries, not closing them. And we’ll continue to stand on the side of ensuring that every voter has a meaningful say in the leaders who represent them.


Nick Troiano is the executive director of Unite America, a philanthropic venture fund that invests in nonpartisan election reform to foster a more representative and functional government. He’s also the author of “ The Primary Solution.”

Read More

This Sheriff’s Office Says Racial Profiling Reforms Are Too Costly. Auditors Found It Misused $163 Million.

The Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office misused $163 million intended to address racial profiling reforms, according to a court-mandated audit.

Illustrations by Shoshana Gordon, ProPublica.
“I’m still under attack:” Karla Toledo, relief and fear after case dismissed

A community member rests on the sidewalk, shielding herself from the sun with a banner outside the Tucson Immigration Court. People show their support for Karla Toledo with banners and petitions, and by wearing pink — a color representing solidarity with communities affected by mass deportation policies.

Credit: Summer Williams

“I’m still under attack:” Karla Toledo, relief and fear after case dismissed

Karla Toledo — the DACA recipient detained by masked immigration agents at her own home in mid-May — celebrated the dismissal of her case by a judge in Tucson. The 31-year-old Latina immigrant expressed both relief and caution.

About 30 people gathered Wednesday outside the Tucson Immigration Court building for what was expected to be Karla’s first hearing after her arrest and confinement at Eloy Detention Center. Family and community members carried signs with Karla’s image that read: “Stand with Karla. Protect Dreamers.”

Keep ReadingShow less
 Shadow on a wall of Judge hitting gavel in court, concept of justice, law, and legal protection

The Trump Justice Department faces scrutiny over alleged prosecutorial misconduct, political pressure, and threats to the rule of law and judicial integrity.

Aitor Diago / Getty Images

Is There Anything That Trump’s Justice Department Lawyers Won’t Do?

There was a time when working for the United States Department of Justice might have been a lawyer’s dream. Speaking on behalf of the United States, working with people who were dedicated to preserving the rule of law and upholding the highest standards of professionalism, not a bad gig.

As Harvard Law School once explained, the department offered lawyers an unparalleled “opportunity to serve the public in a meaningful way while carrying out the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) mandate to ‘pursue justice’ every day…” Not a bad gig.

Keep ReadingShow less

One Year After Arrest, Pressure Mounts on El Salvador to Free Ruth López

Human rights organizations across the Americas are intensifying pressure on the Salvadoran government to immediately release Ruth Eleonora López, a prominent anti‑corruption attorney who has now spent more than a year in pretrial detention under what advocates describe as arbitrary, retaliatory, and rights‑violating conditions. López, who leads the Anti‑Corruption and Justice Unit at Cristosal, was detained on May 18, 2025, and has remained behind bars ever since. Her case has become a flashpoint in the region’s debate over democratic backsliding and the criminalization of civil society under President Nayib Bukele.

According to Amnesty International, López’s first hours in custody amounted to a short‑term enforced disappearance, as authorities refused to reveal her whereabouts to her family or legal team. The organization reports that she has since been held under an incommunicado regime, with sharply restricted access to counsel and relatives, while her case remains sealed under judicial secrecy — preventing any public examination of the evidence against her. Over the past year, the charges have shifted without explanation, moving from alleged embezzlement tied to advisory work more than a decade ago to illicit enrichment. Human Rights Watch notes that no evidence has been presented in open court, and a judge extended her pretrial detention in December 2025, with the current order set to expire this month. The Human Rights Research Center adds that López’s imprisonment reflects a broader pattern in El Salvador of criminalizing human rights defenders, journalists, and anti‑corruption advocates.

Keep ReadingShow less