Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

A first in Oklahoma: Lawmakers reverse a court to still restrict mail voting

Oklahoma Legislature

The Legislature revived an unusually strict rule for absentee voting: all must include an affidavit signed by a notary.

Jordan McAlister/Getty Images

In just three days, the Republicans in charge of lawmaking in Oklahoma have reversed a decision by the state's top court that absentee ballots don't have to be notarized.

It's the first time this year, when the coronavirus pandemic has launched battles over mail-in voting in courthouses across the country, when the political branches of a state government have reinstated election rules struck down as overly restrictive by the judicial branch.

Oklahoma has now rejoined a roster of just three states — the others are South Carolina and Mississippi — that even during this time of social distancing will require absentee voters to sign an affidavit and then get it stamped in person by a notary public.


The rapid-fire sequence of actions went like this: The Supreme Court ruled Monday in favor of the League of Women Voters, which argued in its lawsuit that getting a ballot notarized during the pandemic would force people to put their health at risk. The state House passed a measure reversing that ruling on Wednesday, the state Senate cleared the bill Thursday afternoon and Gov. Kevin Stitt signed it that evening.

Republicans, who hold 79 percent of the seats in the Legislature, argued the notary requirement was needed to prevent voter fraud and that the state's top court had exceeded its authority.

Senate President Pro Tempore Greg Treat, for example, said the justices had "legislated from the bench" at a time when "Oklahomans need to have confidence that our election process is secure and free from fraud."

Ryan Kiesel, executive director of the state's American Civil Liberties Union chapter, said in a statement: "This legislative attack is based on bogus claims of voter fraud, but it is abundantly clear that the real motivation is to make it harder for Oklahomans to exercise their power at the ballot."

The law — which not only requires mail-in ballots to get notarized but also limits how many documents each notary may witness — has clearly had an effect on voting from home in the state. Just 5 percent of ballots were cast that way in 2018, a midterm election when about a quarter of all votes nationwide were mailed in.

Congressional and state legislative primaries are set for June 30, but the top issue on the ballot is a citizen-driven statewide referendum that would expand Medicaid to cover tens of thousands of lower-income Oklahomans. Stitt and most of the state's GOP leadership oppose the measure.

One potential easement was written into the new law in response to Covid-19. If the governor in the next eight days reinstates his emergency declaration, which he lifted just last week, absentee voters may submit a copy of their driver's license or other ID in lieu of finding a notary.


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