Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

No mail-in primary, N.M. high court rules, but absentee voting encouraged

absentee ballot
nycshooter/Getty Images

New Mexico did not last long at the center of the campaign to make voting by mail the default setting for elections during the coronavirus pandemic.

What had loomed as a protracted partisan battle over the rules for the state's primaries, similar to the one that caused chaos last week in Wisconsin, was settled decisively Tuesday at the state Supreme Court. The justices unanimously rejected a plan to restrict in-person voting while sending mail-back ballots to almost all registered voters.

The pace of Covid-19 infections in New Mexico is on course to peak within two weeks of the June 2 primary, meaning thousands who don't request and receive an absentee ballot in time could be confronted with a tough choice between exercising their civic duty and guarding their health.


A dozen other states across the county have primaries set for that day. The only contests before then are in Oregon, Idaho and Kansas, and all are relying on voting by mail.

In New Mexico, four of the five people on the high court panel that decided the case are Democrats, and after a four-hour hearing and two hours of deliberations they agreed with the Republicans that state law would be violated under the vote-by-mail proposal.

Instead, the court ordered state and local election authorities to distribute absentee ballot applications to all who have registered to vote by the May 5 deadline. That will be about 1 million registered Republicans and Democrats, because primaries in the state are closed to independents.

In theory, four weeks would be plenty of time to request, receive, complete and return such a bar-coded form.

Democratic Secretary of State Maggie Toulouse Oliver, the state Democratic Party and 27 of the state's 33 county clerks wanted instead to proactively deliver the ballots and then open 170 polling stations on election day for turning in the votes, completing provisional ballots, and seeking language or disability assistance.

"No one can deny the devastating effect that this virus has had and continues to have on our community," Chief Justice Judith Nakamura said in announcing the court's decision on a videoconference. "However the relief that is requested is specifically prohibited by New Mexico statute ... which says that a mail ballot shall not be delivered by the county clerk to any person other than the applicant for the ballot."

Democrtatic Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham said late Tuesday her government would work to minimize the number of people who would be compelled to vote or work at the polls on primary day because such behaviors would pose "a grave threat of heightened transmission of the virus."

With the Democratic presidential contest effectively ended, the turnout will mainly affect close races for nominations to judicial positions, the Legislature and Congress, particularly an expensive and hotly contested campaign for an open and reliably blue House seat centered on Santa Fe.

Nakamura is the only justice who joined the court as a Republican. Two justices running for re-election this fall as Democrats recused themselves and were replaced for the case by lower-court Democrats.

A special session of the Legislature to change the law was not a viable option in light of the statewide stay-at-home order that's very likely to be extended through next month.


Read More

Voters lining up to vote.

Voters line up at the Oak Lawn Branch Library voting center on Primary Election Day in Dallas on March 3, 2026. Republicans' decision to hold a split primary from the Democrats and to eliminate countywide voting forced Dallas County voters to cast ballots at assigned neighborhood precincts, leading to confusion. Republicans have now decided to use countywide polling locations for the May 26 runoff election.

Shelby Tauber for The Texas Tribune

Dallas County GOP Will Agree To Use Countywide Voting Sites for May 26 Runoff Election

Dallas County Republicans will agree to allow voters to cast ballots at countywide voting sites for the May 26 runoff election after a switch to precinct-based voting sites caused chaos, the county party chair said Tuesday.

Dallas County Republican Chairman Allen West supported the use of precinct-based sites earlier this month, but said using precincts again for the runoff would expose the county party to “increased risk and voter confusion” because the county is planning to use countywide sites for upcoming municipal elections and early voting.

Keep ReadingShow less
A person signing a piece of paper with other people around them.

Javon Jackson, center, was able to register to vote following passage of a 2019 Nevada law that restored voting rights to formerly incarcerated individuals.

The Nation Is Missing Millions of Voters Due to Lack of Rights for Former Felons

If you gathered every American with a prison record into one contiguous territory and admitted it to the union, you would create the 12th-largest state. It would be home to at least 7 million to 8 million people and hold a dozen votes in the Electoral College.

In a close presidential race, this hypothetical state of the formerly incarcerated could decide who wins the White House.

Keep ReadingShow less
With the focus on the voting posters, the people in the background of the photo sign up to vote.

An analysis of Trump’s SAVE Act strategy, the voter ID debate, and how Pew data is being misused—exploring election integrity, voter suppression, and the political fight shaping U.S. democracy.

Getty Images, SDI Productions

Stop Fighting Voter ID. Start Defining It.

President Trump doesn't need the SAVE America Act to pass. He only needs the debate to continue. Every minute spent arguing about voter suppression repeats the underlying premise — that noncitizen voting is a real and widespread problem — until it feels like an established fact. The question is whether Democrats will contest Republicans’ definition before the frame hardens.

Trump's claim that 88% of Americans support the bill traces to a Pew Research Center survey — a survey that found 83% support a “government-issued photo ID to vote,” not extreme vetting for proof of citizenship. That support included 95% of Republicans and 71% of Democrats, indicating genuine, broad, bipartisan support for a basic civic principle. That's worth taking seriously.

Keep ReadingShow less
People standing at voting booths.

The proposed SAVE Act and MEGA Act would require proof of citizenship to register to vote, risking the disenfranchisement of millions of eligible Americans.

Getty Images, EvgeniyShkolenko

The SAVE Act is a Solution in Search of A Problem

The federal government seems to be barreling toward a federal election power grab. Trump's State of the Union address called for the Senate to push through the SAVE Act, which has already passed the House, in the name of so-called "election integrity." And the SAVE Act isn’t the only such bill. Like the SAVE Act, the Make Elections Great Again (MEGA) Act—introduced in the House—would require voters to provide a document outlined in the Act that allegedly proves their U.S. citizenship. We’ve been down this road before in Texas, and spoiler alert: it was unworkable.

Both the SAVE and MEGA Acts would disenfranchise millions of eligible U.S. citizens without making our federal elections more secure. They seek to roll out a faulty federal voter registration system, despite the existing separate registration and voting process for state and local elections. And these Acts target a minuscule “problem”—but would unleash mass voter purges and confusion.

Keep ReadingShow less