Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

More court rulings in favor of a complete (if not quick) election

vote by mail

Legal decisions issued over the past few days significant impact voting by mail in a half-dozen states.

Tetra Images/Getty Images

This month's flurry of courthouse wins is continuing for advocates of a comprehensive and safe election. The most important decision out of six since Friday could prevent the presidential election winner from being declared until the middle of November.

Michigan absentee ballots must be counted so long as they arrive within two weeks of the election, a judge ruled Friday. If not reversed on appeal, the ruling means the tallying of potentially hundreds of thousands of votes won't be done until Nov. 17 in a state Donald Trump carried by a scant 11,000 votes last time — and with 16 electoral votes that remain a tossup again this time.

Judges also allowed easier absentee voting in the biggest county in Texas, relaxed a vote-by-mail restriction in South Carolina and tossed a lawsuit seeking to limit mail voting in Illinois. And the Postal Service agreed to destroy millions of its misleading voter mailings. The only bad news for voting rights groups came from the Supreme Court of Mississippi, which ruled people at high risk of severe Covid-19 complications don't have an automatic right to vote absentee.

These are the latest developments:


Michigan

Judge Cynthia Diane Stephens of the Court of Claims cited mail delays and past problems with misrouted ballot envelopes in ordering the extension. But she said it will apply only to ballots postmarked by Nov. 2. Normally, the state is one of 33 where ballots may be postmarked as late as Election Day (Nov. 3 this year) but still have to arrive by the time the polls close, and that resulted in thousands of ballots getting rejected in the August primary.

"This is a HUGE win for all Michigan voters who plan to vote by mail in November," exulted Marc Elias, the attorney who helped push the suit. It's one of the most prominent of nearly 20 he's filed on behalf of the Democratic Party this year, starting before the coronavirus pandemic, in hopes of winning easements to the rules likely to boost turnout by Democrats.

The judge also ruled in favor of the Democrats on another issue, saying party operatives and other third parties may collect and return completed absentee ballots on behalf of Michiganders — the practice pejoratively labeled "ballot harvesting" by Republicans who maintain, with only scattered evidence, that it allows for easy fraud.

Stephens rejected, however, the Democrats' bid to make the state pay for return postage on mail ballots.

Texas

A state appeals court endorsed a plan to mail absentee ballot applications to all 2.4 million registered voters in Harris County, which is centered on Houston and where elections are run by a Democrat.

But it put that decision on hold pending a ruling expected in the next few weeks from the state Supreme Court, where every justice is a Republican. GOP Attorney General Ken Paxton opposes the mass mailing on the grounds it could promote cheating, an argument the appeals panel rejected as "based on mere conjecture."

Getting an application would not necessarily lead to another vote cast by mail, however. The second-most-populous state is one of just five, and the only one where the presidential contest is competitive, that is maintaining its usual excuse requirements despite the Covid-19 outbreak.

While being older than 65 is an acceptable excuse, and Harris County has already sent those people application forms, younger people must claim travel or health as preventing them from voting in person — and earlier court rulings this year said fear of the pandemic is not, by itself, an acceptable reason.

The deadline for asking for a mail-in ballot is in four weeks, setting an effective timetable for a meaningful decision from the state's high court.

South Carolina

The pandemic and the need for social distancing means voters should not have to comply this fall with the usual state law making them find a witness to countersign their absentee ballot envelopes, federal Judge Michelle Childs ruled Friday.

The judge's order, in another lawsuit brought by Elias and the Democrats, said the rule would illegally suppress the vote of the disabled and Black people, who have proved more likely to be affected by the virus. As written, the law would even make people symptomatically ill with Covid-19 find a witness — and then exposing those additional people to the virus.

The state may appeal the decision. Just last week, Republicans in charge in Columbia insisted on leaving the signature requirement in place on the grounds that it guards against fraud, even as they agreed to suspend the state's usual excuse rules so that anyone in the reliably red state (albeit one with an increasingly close Senate contest) may vote by mail this year.

The leaders of the GOP majority in the General Assembly had asked Childs to leave the decision to legislators, but she said "substantive issues under the Constitution and federal law" prompted her to intervene.

Illinois

Federal Judge Robert Dow dismissed last month's lawsuit from Republicans seeking to block the state's new law making voting easier.

The judge said there was no evidence to support the central claim: that the new rules were pushed through by the Democrats in charge in Springfield this spring in an effort to disenfranchise GOP voters by making it easier for their opponents to cheat, especially in Chicago.

"Plaintiff's allegations rest primarily on unsupported speculation and secondarily on isolated instances of voter fraud in other states and historical examples from Illinois during the prior century," the judge wrote.

The law, passed by the General Assembly and signed by Gov. J.B. Pritzker this spring, allows election officials to send absentee ballot applications to anyone who voted in the 2018 midterm, last year's municipal elections or the primary in March. More than 1.3 million forms have been returned and maybe a million more are expected from people deciding to avoid in-person voting because of Covid-19.

Postal Service

The Postal Service settled a lawsuit filed just 10 days ago by Colorado, agreeing to destroy whatever copies haven't already been distributed of a postcard that was destined for every household in the nation. While its aim was to educate Americans about the need to plan ahead if voting by mail, some of it's advice seemed confusing or contradictory in light of the rules and requirements in many states — mainly in places, like Colorado, that are planning for almost entirely vote-by-mail elections this fall.

The USPS also agreed to allow Colorado's attorney general and secretary of state to preview any other national mailings related to the election — and the right to block any they believe would confuse the state's voters.

Last week the post office worked to stop distributing the mailing, which had already landed in about three-quarters of the state's mailboxes, after Colorado sued. But tens of million continued to arrive across the rest of the country, the latest problem for an agency — and in particular its boss, Postmaster General Louis DJoy — beset by suspicion of working with the Trump administration to undermine the mail as a vehicle for democracy this fall.

Mississippi

The state's reputation as one of the hardest places to vote, which has only been reinforced during the pandemic, was furthered by the latest decision from its Supreme Court.

"Having a pre-existing condition that puts a voter at a higher risk does not automatically create a temporary disability for absentee-voting purpose," the majority held in a decision that does not expand access to absentee ballots to anyone worried about the risk of contracting Covid-19.

Deeply red Mississippi is one of just five states that have held onto their strict excuse rules for voting by mail this year; 11 others have relaxed them because of the pandemic.

In July, the Legislature in fact made the rules somewhat more exacting. The law used to make an absentee ballot available to those with a "temporary or permanent physical disability" who cannot vote in person without substantial hardship or risk. But, rather than allow that to be broadly interpreted during the coronavirus, legislators added language to specifically allow absentee voting by those caring for someone in, or themselves under, "a physician-imposed quarantine" because of Covid-19

Voting rights groups sued. One of their main arguments was that the state health director's guidance to avoid large indoor gatherings amounts to a doctor's statewide quarantine order. A trial court rejected that argument and the high court underscored her decision.


Read More

Nicolas Maduro’s Capture: Sovereignty Only Matters When It’s Convenient

US Capitol and South America. Nicolas Maduro’s capture is not the end of an era. It marks the opening act of a turbulent transition

AI generated

Nicolas Maduro’s Capture: Sovereignty Only Matters When It’s Convenient

The U.S. capture of Nicolás Maduro will be remembered as one of the most dramatic American interventions in Latin America in a generation. But the real story isn’t the raid itself. It’s what the raid reveals about the political imagination of the hemisphere—how quickly governments abandon the language of sovereignty when it becomes inconvenient, and how easily Washington slips back into the posture of regional enforcer.

The operation was months in the making, driven by a mix of narcotrafficking allegations, geopolitical anxiety, and the belief that Maduro’s security perimeter had finally cracked. The Justice Department’s $50 million bounty—an extraordinary price tag for a sitting head of state—signaled that the U.S. no longer viewed Maduro as a political problem to be negotiated with, but as a criminal target to be hunted.

Keep ReadingShow less
Red elephants and blue donkeys

The ACA subsidy deadline reveals how Republican paralysis and loyalty-driven leadership are hollowing out Congress’s ability to govern.

Carol Yepes

Governing by Breakdown: The Cost of Congressional Paralysis

Picture a bridge with a clearly posted warning: without a routine maintenance fix, it will close. Engineers agree on the repair, but the construction crew in charge refuses to act. The problem is not that the fix is controversial or complex, but that making the repair might be seen as endorsing the bridge itself.

So, traffic keeps moving, the deadline approaches, and those responsible promise to revisit the issue “next year,” even as the risk of failure grows. The danger is that the bridge fails anyway, leaving everyone who depends on it to bear the cost of inaction.

Keep ReadingShow less
White House
A third party candidate has never won the White House, but there are two ways to examine the current political situation, writes Anderson.
DEA/M. BORCHI/Getty Images

250 Years of Presidential Scandals: From Harding’s Oil Bribes to Trump’s Criminal Conviction

During the 250 years of America’s existence, whenever a scandal involving the U.S. President occurred, the public was shocked and dismayed. When presidential scandals erupt, faith and trust in America – by its citizens as well as allies throughout the world – is lost and takes decades to redeem.

Below are several of the more prominent presidential scandals, followed by a suggestion as to how "We the People" can make America truly America again like our founding fathers so eloquently established in the constitution.

Keep ReadingShow less
Money and the American flag
Half of Americans want participatory budgeting at the local level. What's standing in the way?
SimpleImages/Getty Images

For the People, By the People — Or By the Wealthy?

When did America replace “for the people, by the people” with “for the wealthy, by the wealthy”? Wealthy donors are increasingly shaping our policies, institutions, and even the balance of power, while the American people are left as spectators, watching democracy erode before their eyes. The question is not why billionaires need wealth — they already have it. The question is why they insist on owning and controlling government — and the people.

Back in 1968, my Government teacher never spoke of powerful think tanks like the Heritage Foundation, now funded by billionaires determined to avoid paying their fair share of taxes. Yet here in 2025, these forces openly work to control the Presidency, Congress, and the Supreme Court through Project 2025. The corruption is visible everywhere. Quid pro quo and pay for play are not abstractions — they are evident in the gifts showered on Supreme Court justices.

Keep ReadingShow less