Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

DOJ Now Says Texas Voting Rights Are OK

The Trump administration, reversing the Justice Department's position in one of the most important voting rights cases in the country, now says Texas should not have to get federal permission for any changes to its election system.

The changed position came in a lawsuit challenging the state's congressional and legislative maps as gerrymandered to limit the political power of blacks and Latinos.


The Supreme Court six years ago struck down the part of the Voting Rights Act that has been most widely used to require many parts of the South, including Texas, to "pre-clear" any voting changes with the federal government. The plaintiffs in the Texas case cite a different provision, which says pre-clearance can be required in places with a clear and continuing history of intentional discrimination. Placing all of the country's second biggest state in that category would be a major victory for voting rights groups and a huge blow to conservatives arguing that states hold be left alone to set their own election rules.

"Generations of DOJ lawyers, including myself, have taken turns combating Texas' many racially discriminatory voting policies. If Texas can't meet this DOJ's standards for warranting pre-clearance, I suspect no jurisdiction can," Sasha Samberg-Champion, a former senior attorney in the appellate section of the Justice Department's civil rights division, told the HuffPost.


Read More

CT election security group honors 10 years of fighting for democracy

A 2021 poll shows 73% of Connecticut voters supported the amendment giving all voters the option to vote by absentee ballot without needing an excuse.

(Adobe Stock)

CT election security group honors 10 years of fighting for democracy

A Connecticut voting-rights group is celebrating its 10th anniversary.

Bridgeport Generation Now has worked to broaden voting access and ensure fairer elections for city residents. Some of its most important work came at a time when many Bridgeport residents felt their votes didn't matter, pointing to absentee ballot fraud as the cause.

Keep ReadingShow less
Court’s Slaughter Decision Hands Presidents Sweeping New Authority

U.S. President Donald Trump in the Oval Office at the White House on July 24, 2026 in Washington, DC.

Photo by Eric Lee/Getty Images)

Court’s Slaughter Decision Hands Presidents Sweeping New Authority

This series from Lawyers Defending American Democracy connects the words of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution to current events that threaten democracy and the justice system. Each piece highlights the unique responsibility lawyers carry—through their oath, professional obligations, and roles in their communities—to help the public understand what’s at risk and to speak out when democratic principles are under threat. LDAD’s call to action is straightforward: as the Founders once did, we must recognize threats to constitutional values, demand accountability, and act to defend them.

In its recent decision in Trump v. Slaughter, a divided Supreme Court approved an expansive use of presidential power that upsets the Constitutional balance between Congress and the President. The Court approved the President’s summary dismissal of agency leaders (in this case, commissioners of the Federal Trade Commission), notwithstanding a statute signed by a former President and the Court's own precedent specifically forbidding such dismissals. This decision will further politicize and weaponize much of our federal government.

Keep ReadingShow less