Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Democrats challenge early voting limits in two ’20 battlegrounds

Democrats challenge early voting limits in two ’20 battlegrounds

The early voting laws in Texas and North Carolina would both have significant inpact on turnout among young voters.

Mario Tama/Getty Images

Democratic groups are challenging the constitutionality of new state laws written by Republicans to curb early voting in two of the biggest battleground states of 2020.

The Texas Democratic Party and the national Democratic campaign committees filed a federal lawsuit this week alleging a law curbing the use of temporary or mobile early voting sites is unconstitutional. Also this week, those same national committees joined the North Carolina Democratic Party in suing to restore early voting in the state on the Saturday before Election Day.

Turnout will be crucial to the Democrats' attempts to win North Carolina's 15 electoral votes for the first time since 2008 and especially to carry Texas, now the second biggest prize with 38 electoral votes, for the first time since 1976. The party is also expected to make an intense run at GOP Sen. Thom Tillis in North Carolina and a longer-shot quest to unseat GOP Sen. John Cornyn in Texas.


Both laws at issue were enacted last year and appear to have their strongest potential impact on younger voters.

The Texas statute is an attempt to limit youth voting in particular by reducing polling places on college campuses, one suit maintains. "In direct contravention of the 26th Amendment," the complaint alleges, the state enacted the law "with the intent and effect of preventing newly-enfranchised young Texans from effectively exercising their right to vote."

The groups are asking a judge to block the law, which has already led to the closure of temporary voting sites on campuses ahead of next week's statewide balloting on 10 potential amendments to the Texas constitution.

The North Carolina measure eliminated the option to vote on the Saturday before the November election, which was the most popular day for early voting in the 2018 midterm, according to the complaint. The assembly later overrode a veto by Democratic Gov. Roy Cooper to keep the new restriction in place.

Saturday early voting is popular among African-Americans and young voters, the complaint alleges, which is why Republican legislators sought to end the practice ahead of the coming presidential election.


Read More

Republican, Democratic and independent checkboxes, with the third one checked

Analysis of California’s open primary system, political reform, and voter empowerment amid gubernatorial tensions and calls to restore party control.

zimmytws/Getty Images

California Schemin’

Both before and after Eric Swalwell’s resignation, the California Gubernatorial race has partisan insiders screaming that California’s innovative, voter-friendly, open primary system should be scrapped. Why? Seven Democrats and two Republicans are running. If all the Democrats stay in the race, and none surges, there is a statistical possibility that the two Republicans advance to the general election.

The attacks are pure opportunism, from people who oppose open primaries, period. Never mind that seven million independent voters have been enfranchised and elections are much more competitive, according to these critics, the fact that the Gubernatorial race might feature two Republicans is absolute proof that the old system needs to be restored.

Keep ReadingShow less
Official ballots with a chain and lock over them, and the USA flag behind them.

The impact of election fraud claims and voting laws on democracy in the United States. Daniel O. Jamison examines voter suppression concerns, mail-in ballot policies, and the broader political struggle over election integrity.

Getty Images, JJ Gouin

If It Ain’t Broke, Don’t Fix It

For nearly ten years, claims that our elections are riddled with fraud have threatened the foundation of our democratic republic.

It is alleged that Democrats have flooded the country with illegal immigrants who then illegally vote for Democrats. Purportedly to protect the country from this, Republicans seek legislation that would, among other provisions, restrict vote-by-mail, require potentially expensive and onerous proof of citizenship to register to vote, and require potentially expensive photo identification to vote.

Keep ReadingShow less
The Fahey Q&A with Elizabeth Rasmussen

An in-depth interview with Elizabeth Rasmussen of Better Boundaries on Utah’s redistricting battle, Proposition 4, and the fight to protect ballot initiatives, fair maps, and democratic accountability.

The Fahey Q&A with Elizabeth Rasmussen

Since organizing the Voters Not Politicians 2018 ballot initiative that put citizens in charge of drawing Michigan's legislative maps, Fahey has been the founding executive director of The People, which is forming statewide networks to promote government accountability. She regularly interviews colleagues in the world of democracy reform for The Fulcrum.

Elizabeth Rasmussen is the Executive Director for Better Boundaries, a Utah-based organization fighting for fair maps, defending the citizen initiative process, preserving checks and balances, and building a better future. Currently making headlines in the state, Better Boundaries is working to protect Proposition 4, and with it, the rights of Utah voters.

Keep ReadingShow less
A sign that reads, "Voter Registration," hanging from the cieling, pointing to an office with the words, "Voter registration," above its doorway.

The voter registration office at the Nueces County Courthouse in Corpus Christi, Texas on Sept. 11, 2024. Voting rights groups are challenging the state's use of a federal database to check the citizenship status of people on the state's voter roll.

Gabriel Cárdenas for Votebeat

Voting Rights Groups Challenge Texas’ Removal of Potential Noncitizens From the Voter Roll

What happened?

Voting rights groups are suing the Texas Secretary of State’s Office and some county election officials to prevent the removal of voters from the state’s voter roll based on use of a federal database to verify citizenship. They also claim the state failed to crosscheck its own records for proof of citizenship it already possessed before seeking to remove voters.

Keep ReadingShow less