Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Tennessee off the list of states allowing all to vote by mail because of Covid

Tennessee Supreme Court

The Tennessee Supreme Court's ruling represents the first time a state's top court has used an appeal to restrict absentee voting in November.

pabradyphoto/Getty Images

The persistence of the pandemic is not a sufficient rationale for allowing everyone in Tennessee to vote by mail this fall, the state's top court has ruled, putting the state back on the otherwise shrinking roster of places with excuse requirements for getting an absentee ballot.

Wednesday's 4-1 decision by the state Supreme Court overturned a lower court's declaration two months ago that all eligible voters be permitted to use the mail this year in order to avoid Covid-19 exposure. It stands as the first time a state's top court has used an appeal to make absentee voting in November more restrictive.

As a result, there are now eight states where a reason beyond fear of the coronavirus will be needed to vote for president. Other than New York and Indiana, the rest are spread across the South; of those, all but emerging battleground Texas are reliably Republican red: Kentucky, South Carolina, Mississippi and Louisiana now joined again by Tennessee.


Eight other states have effectively dropped their excuse requirements for this year, one of the reasons why voting from home is destined to surge — maybe accounting for more than half of all votes cast, double the usual share, despite President Trump's efforts to discredit the practice with unfounded claims it produces fraud.

The Tennessee justices did not alter the rules for the record number of absentee ballots already cast for the primary Thursday. But their decision came just in time to govern the entire period for applying to vote by mail in the general election, which also began Thursday.

The state initially wanted the court to block any expansion of mail voting in light of the coronavirus, arguing local election officials could not accommodate, logistically or budgetarily, the subsequent avalanche of ballots. They also cited the risk of election fraud.

But at oral arguments, government lawyers said that being quarantined as a precaution, caring for someone with the virus or having an "underlying health condition" — which voters were free to decide for themselves — allows voters to check the "illness" box on their application forms.

"The state's interests in the efficacy and integrity of the election process are sufficient to justify the moderate burden placed on the right to vote" for people not covered by the newly promised easements, Justice Cornelia Clark wrote for the court.

She also told Tennessee officials to quickly detail for the public the state's new view of Covid-19 and mail voting.

That prompted a qualified embrace of the decision from the American Civil Liberties Union, which helped sue over the expansion.

"The court should have gone further, however, and ruled that all eligible voters have a right to vote safely by mail," said the ACLU's top voting rights attorney, Dale Ho. "But this ruling remains an important victory for many Tennessee voters."

The General Assembly also returns next week for a special session, where minority Democrats are expected to take another run at legislation expanding the excuse rules. Republican Gov. Bill Lee has vowed to veto such a measure, though.

Fewer than 3 percent of the state's votes have arrived in envelopes in recent elections, one of the smallest shares in the nation. Even before the court's decision, Republican Secretary of State Tre Hargett was preparing for that percentage to soar — because 1.4 million voters, more than a third of those registered, are automatically eligible to vote absentee because they've had their 60th birthdays.

The Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law and the Campaign Legal Center have filed a federal lawsuit seeking unfettered mail voting and also challenging three other curbs on the practice. One is an unusual rule preventing the newly registered from casting their first votes by mail unless they apply for the ballot in person and show proof of identity.

Trump can count on the state's 11 electoral votes, which he won last time by 26 points. Turnout in the 2016 election was 62 percent, but it may be less this year because of a lack of any competitive statewide races.

The winner of Thursday's hotly contested GOP primary for the Senate seat held by Republican Lamar Alexander, who's retiring, is a near shoe-in come November. That race is between Bill Hagerty, who was Trump's ambassador to Japan, and Manny Sethi, an orthopedic trauma surgeon running as a conservative outsider ready to take on the "establishment" while still supporting the president.


Read More

The election voting process, bidding, hands raised up with papers

Confidence in U.S. elections has fallen to 55% ahead of the 2026 midterms. The real risk isn't who wins — it's whether the loser accepts it.

Svetlana Shamshurina/Getty Images

The Real Test of the 2026 Midterms Comes After the Vote

Less than three months before Americans vote in the 2026 midterms, a federal judge on August 11 blocked the U.S. Postal Service from implementing part of President Donald Trump’s executive order tightening mail-in voting rules. The ruling came amid an intensifying fight over how November’s elections will be administered. That fight underscores a deeper problem: the real question in American politics is no longer simply who wins the next election, but whether large numbers of people will still accept the result when their side loses.

Elections in the United States were supposed to settle arguments. One side wins, the other accepts defeat, and the country moves on. That quiet agreement is under growing pressure as the midterms approach. Control of Congress still matters, but beneath that contest lies a more consequential question: if the outcome goes against one of the two major political camps, will that camp still trust the process that declared it the loser?

Keep ReadingShow less
 Unrecognizable doctor prescribing pharmacy to patient.

After a 30-year decline, U.S. abortions are rising again. Texas data suggests bans may shift where abortions happen — not whether they do.

Natalia Gdovskaia/Getty Images

Pro-Life and Pro-Choice: Bridging the Gap

Introduction

We have spent decades arguing about abortion policy on ideological grounds. I think we now have an opportunity to step back, look at what actually happened, and ask a more fundamental question: What policies actually reduce the number of abortions?

I believe that is a question on which pro-life and pro-choice people should be able to agree. Whatever our differences about abortion itself, surely, we can agree that fewer abortions would be a good outcome.

Keep ReadingShow less
U.S. Capitol.

A rundown of the House bills most likely to become law this week — from seafood fraud enforcement to a sanctions bill critics call a tariff bill.

Photo by Andy Feliciotti on Unsplash

Both Chambers in Session this Week

Last Minute Rush

We’re not going to describe every bill the House aims to take action on this week because there’s lots. Instead, we’re going to focus on the ones that will become law if passed by the House and pull a few notable bills at the beginning of the legislative process. We’ll use the same level of discretion at the end of this week when we review what actually happened between today, Monday Sept. 14 and Friday, Sept. 18.

Probable New Laws

In addition to the bills listed below are also a couple of park renamings. All of these will, if passed, then go to the President for signing and once that’s done, become law.

Keep ReadingShow less