Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Top 3 Great Lakes battlegrounds have mail ballot extensions, at least for now

Great Lakes states map
mapchart.net

Delayed-in-the-mail extensions for absentee ballots have now been ordered by courts in all three of the crucial Great Lakes battlegrounds, increasing the odds for a more comprehensive but also a more prolonged presidential election.

The later deadlines that judges have ordered in the past week in Pennsylvania, Michigan and now Wisconsin are far from locked in place, however, because Republican efforts to reverse them are likely in all three states — with their collective 46 electoral votes central to President Trump's reelection prospects.

Federal Judge William Conley, for starters, has put in limbo for one week his own order on Tuesday, that Wisconsin ballots postmarked by Election Day be counted as valid if received by local clerks by Nov. 9, a six-day extension. He said he was putting a hold on that ruling to avoid confusion if his decision is overturned on appeal, and to keep the pressure on Wisconsinites to vote early.


A state appeals judge on Friday granted a two-week extension in Michigan for the arrival of ballots postmarked by the day before Election Day; the previous day, the state Supreme Court ordered a three-day grace period for mailed ballots in Pennsylvania.

All three decisions came in lawsuits filed by Democrats and voting rights groups, which have filed dozens of such claims across the country this year in hopes the courts will ease access to the ballot box and thereby boost turnout to the benefit of their candidates.

The Trump campaign said Tuesday it would press in the federal courts to restore the usual deadline in Pennsylvania — potentially setting up the first election cases to get before the Supreme Court since the death last week of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

The Republican National Committee and the state GOP organizations in Wisconsin and Michigan, which argued for the status quo in those states, are expected to press their cases in the appeals courts.

Like 30 other states, Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania normally invalidate ballots that arrive after the polls close. That could disenfranchise tens of thousands this year. Record numbers of voters in all three states, and almost everywhere across the country, are expected to test the Postal Service's capacity by casting their first-ever remote ballots in the next six weeks so they can avoid potential coronavirus exposure at a polling place.

"It is particularly unreasonable to expect undecided voters to exercise their voting franchise by absentee ballot well before the end of the presidential campaign, especially when Wisconsin's statutory deadline is giving them a false sense of confidence in timely receipt," the judge in that case wrote.

If his and the other court orders stand, they will almost guarantee a wait of a week or more after Election Day for the outcome of close races up and down the ballot — including, perhaps, the national presidential contest.

Significantly complicating a speedier count are laws in all three states that prevent election officials from beginning to process the ocean of mail ballots they receive — verifying the signatures on the envelopes, removing the ballots from their security sleeves and stacking them in front of the tabulating equipment — until the morning of Nov. 3.

Trump carried the three states by a combined 78,000 votes last time, much less than 1 percent of the votes cast, but for now former Vice President Joe Biden has narrow polling leads in all three.

The president has signaled several times that election night is when he and the country should rightfully expect to know the nationwide winner — a position at odds with the realities of fairly and completely tabulating the contest if it stays close.

The federal court ruling in Wisconsin, tackling a series of suits and countersuits by both parties and their allies, addressed a welter of efforts to make voting easier in a state that has had one of the rockiest records of election administration during the coronavirus pandemic. (Just last week another disaster was averted when a court permitted more than 1 million vote-by-mail packets to be distributed on time across the state.)

Conley gave voters until Oct. 21 to register to vote by mail or online, a one-week extension. For those who do not receive requested mail ballots on time, he ordered the state to provide replacements online or by email. And he said poll workers may live in any county in the state, not just in the one where they're working — easing the burden on clerks to find poll workers during a public health emergency.

But the judge denied many of the things Democrats were after — including expanded early in-person voting, state-paid postage on mailed ballots and easements of voter ID requirements for in-person voting and witness signatures on mailed ballots.

Read More

A close up of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement badge.

Trump’s mass deportations promise security but deliver economic pain, family separation, and chaos. Here’s why this policy is failing America.

Getty Images, Tennessee Witney

The Cruel Arithmetic of Trump’s Immigration Crackdown

As summer 2025 winds down, the Trump administration’s deportation machine is operating at full throttle—removing over one million people in six months and fulfilling a campaign promise to launch the “largest deportation operation in American history.” For supporters, this is a victory lap for law and order. For the rest of the lot, it’s a costly illusion—one that trades complexity for spectacle and security for chaos.

Let’s dispense with the fantasy first. The administration insists that mass deportations will save billions, reduce crime, and protect American jobs. But like most political magic tricks, the numbers vanish under scrutiny. The Economic Policy Institute warns that this policy could destroy millions of jobs—not just for immigrants but for U.S.-born workers in sectors like construction, elder care, and child care. That’s not just a fiscal cliff—it is fewer teachers, fewer caregivers, and fewer homes built. It is inflation with a human face. In fact, child care alone could shrink by over 15%, leaving working parents stranded and employers scrambling.

Meanwhile, the Peterson Institute projects a drop in GDP and employment, while the Penn Wharton School’s Budget Model estimates that deporting unauthorized workers over a decade would slash Social Security revenue and inflate deficits by nearly $900 billion. That’s not a typo. It’s a fiscal cliff dressed up as border security.

And then there’s food. Deporting farmworkers doesn’t just leave fields fallow—it drives up prices. Analysts predict a 10% spike in food costs, compounding inflation and squeezing families already living paycheck to paycheck. In California, where immigrant renters are disproportionately affected, eviction rates are climbing. The Urban Institute warns that deportations are deepening the housing crisis by gutting the construction workforce. So much for protecting American livelihoods.

But the real cost isn’t measured in dollars. It’s measured in broken families, empty classrooms, and quiet despair. The administration has deployed 10,000 armed service members to the border and ramped up “self-deportation” tactics—policies so harsh they force people to leave voluntarily. The result: Children skipping meals because their parents fear applying for food assistance; Cancer patients deported mid-treatment; and LGBTQ+ youth losing access to mental health care. The Human Rights Watch calls it a “crueler world for immigrants.” That’s putting it mildly.

This isn’t targeted enforcement. It’s a dragnet. Green card holders, long-term residents, and asylum seekers are swept up alongside undocumented workers. Viral videos show ICE raids at schools, hospitals, and churches. Lawsuits are piling up. And the chilling effect is real: immigrant communities are retreating from public life, afraid to report crimes or seek help. That’s not safety. That’s silence. Legal scholars warn that the administration’s tactics—raids at schools, churches, and hospitals—may violate Fourth Amendment protections and due process norms.

Even the administration’s security claims are shaky. Yes, border crossings are down—by about 60%, thanks to policies like “Remain in Mexico.” But deportation numbers haven’t met the promised scale. The Migration Policy Institute notes that monthly averages hover around 14,500, far below the millions touted. And the root causes of undocumented immigration—like visa overstays, which account for 60% of cases—remain untouched.

Crime reduction? Also murky. FBI data shows declines in some areas, but experts attribute this more to economic trends than immigration enforcement. In fact, fear in immigrant communities may be making things worse. When people won’t talk to the police, crimes go unreported. That’s not justice. That’s dysfunction.

Public opinion is catching up. In February, 59% of Americans supported mass deportations. By July, that number had cratered. Gallup reports a 25-point drop in favor of immigration cuts. The Pew Research Center finds that 75% of Democrats—and a growing number of independents—think the policy goes too far. Even Trump-friendly voices like Joe Rogan are balking, calling raids on “construction workers and gardeners” a betrayal of common sense.

On social media, the backlash is swift. Users on X (formerly Twitter) call the policy “ineffective,” “manipulative,” and “theater.” And they’re not wrong. This isn’t about solving immigration. It’s about staging a show—one where fear plays the villain and facts are the understudy.

The White House insists this is what voters wanted. But a narrow electoral win isn’t a blank check for policies that harm the economy and fray the social fabric. Alternatives exist: Targeted enforcement focused on violent offenders; visa reform to address overstays; and legal pathways to fill labor gaps. These aren’t radical ideas—they’re pragmatic ones. And they don’t require tearing families apart to work.

Trump’s deportation blitz is a mirage. It promises safety but delivers instability. It claims to protect jobs but undermines the very sectors that keep the country running. It speaks the language of law and order but acts with the recklessness of a demolition crew. Alternatives exist—and they work. Cities that focus on community policing and legal pathways report higher public safety and stronger economies. Reform doesn’t require cruelty. It requires courage.

Keep ReadingShow less
Multi-colored speech bubbles overlapping.

Stanford’s Strengthening Democracy Challenge shows a key way to reduce political violence: reveal that most Americans reject it.

Getty Images, MirageC

In the Aftermath of Assassinations, Let’s Show That Americans Overwhelmingly Disapprove of Political Violence

In the aftermath of Charlie Kirk’s assassination—and the assassination of Minnesota state legislator Melissa Hortman only three months ago—questions inevitably arise about how to reduce the likelihood of similar heinous actions.

Results from arguably the most important study focused on the U.S. context, the Strengthening Democracy Challenge run by Stanford University, point to one straightforward answer: show people that very few in the other party support political violence. This approach has been shown to reduce support for political violence.

Keep ReadingShow less
Celebrating Congressional Excellence: Democracy Awards 2025
United States Capitol in Washington, D.C.

Celebrating Congressional Excellence: Democracy Awards 2025

In a moment of bipartisan celebration, the Congressional Management Foundation (CMF) will honor the winners of its 2025 Democracy Awards, spotlighting congressional offices that exemplify outstanding public service, operational excellence, and innovation in governance.

The ceremony, scheduled for this Thursday, September 18, 2025, in Washington, D.C., will recognize both Republican and Democratic offices across multiple categories, reinforcing the idea that excellence in Congress transcends party lines.

Keep ReadingShow less
Political Assassinations Are Part of the “Constitutional Rot” That Afflicts America
Gen Z and the Dangerous Allure of Political Violence
Gen Z and the Dangerous Allure of Political Violence

Political Assassinations Are Part of the “Constitutional Rot” That Afflicts America

Americans are learning that democracy is a fragile thing. If it is taken for granted, it can wither almost imperceptibly.

Signs of that withering are everywhere. I won’t rehearse them here.

Keep ReadingShow less