Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Voting easements made in Virginia and New York, but stopped in Indiana

Indiana voter

Indiana is one of six states that requires voters to have an excuse not related to the coronavirus in order to vote by mail this fall.

Jeremy Hogan/Getty Images

Six states still require voters to provide an excuse not related to the Covid-19 pandemic in order to get a mail-in ballot this year. A judge decided to keep Indiana on that list Friday while a pair of states took action to make voting easier in 2020.

Virginia has waived the witness signature requirement and New York has made improvements to its absentee ballot verification system. In Missouri, meanwhile, a new legal battle over ballot access is just beginning.

Here are the details:


Indiana

A federal judge said Friday he wouldn't force Indiana officials to expand absentee voting eligibility for the general election. The state currently has 11 valid excuses for voting by mail, but fear of the coronavirus is not one of them.

Indiana Vote By Mail Inc. and a group of voters filed a lawsuit claiming the state's restrictive vote-by-mail policy violated voters' constitutional rights. U.S. District Judge James Patrick Hanlon, however, was not convinced by their argument.

All voters were allowed to cast ballots by mail in the June primary, but the bipartisan Indiana Election Commission has failed to come to a consensus on whether to authorize the similar rules for the fall.

Virginia

Virginia Attorney General Mark Herring announced Friday that voters will not be required to have their absentee ballots signed by a witness for the November election.

After the state made the same easement for the June primary, a group of GOP voters sued, arguing the Covid-19 pandemic is not a valid excuse to loosen vote-by-mail restrictions.

But U.S. District Judge Norman Moon approved Herring's order, saying "every indication before the Court is that the June primary was conducted without the witness signature requirement and without any corresponding increase in voter confusion or election fraud."

New York

New Yorkers voting by mail in the general election will now be notified about and given the opportunity to correct any issues with their absentee ballots, such as a missing signature.

Democratic Gov. Andrew Cuomo said last week he would sign legislation to allow ballot "curing," but the exact provisions have not been finalized due to last-minute negotiations between Cuomo and lawmakers.

New York's absentee ballot verification system has consistently had one of the highest rejection rates in the country — 84,000 primary ballots were rejected in New York City this year. Anticipating a surge in mail voting this fall, state lawmakers wanted to prevent widespread voter disenfranchisement due to voters not being able to correct clerical errors.

The governor also recently signed legislation to add fear of coronavirus infection as a valid excuse to vote absentee this fall.

Missouri

American Women, a national women's advocacy organization, joined with three Missouri residents to sue the secretary of state over five election laws they claim restrict access to the ballot box.

The lawsuit, filed in Cole County Circuit Court last week, seeks to make the following changes to Missouri's election laws:

  • Eliminate the notary requirement for absentee ballots.
  • Provide voters a way to return their absentee ballots without mailing them.
  • Ensure absentee ballots that are postmarked by Election Day, but arrive later due to mail service delays, are still counted.
  • Allow third parties to assist in collecting and submitting mail ballots.
  • Establish fair signature matching protocols and give voters the opportunity to fix errors with their absentee ballot.

Missouri has slightly expanded its vote-by-mail eligibility to those who are considered most at-risk of Covid-19 infection. Earlier this year, the state added a photo ID requirement for voters; anyone who cannot show a photo ID may cast a provisional ballot.


Read More

Is the U.S. at "War" with Iran?

A woman sifts through the rubble in her house in the Beryanak District after it was damaged by missile attacks two days before, on March 15, 2026, in Tehran, Iran.

(Photo by Majid Saeedi/Getty Images)

Is the U.S. at "War" with Iran?

This question is not an exercise in double-talk. It is critical to understand the power that our Constitution grants exclusively to Congress, and the power that resides in the President as Commander-in-Chief of the military.

The Constitution clearly states that Congress has the power to declare war. The President does not have that power. The War Powers Resolution of 1973 recognizes that distribution of power by saying that a President can only introduce military force into an existing or imminent hostility if Congress has declared war or specifically authorized the President to use military force, or there is a national emergency created by an attack on the U.S.

Keep ReadingShow less
Healthcare Jobs Surge Mask a Productivity Crisis—and Rising Costs
person sitting while using laptop computer and green stethoscope near

Healthcare Jobs Surge Mask a Productivity Crisis—and Rising Costs

Healthcare and social assistance professions added 693,000 jobs in 2025. Without those gains, the U.S. economy would have lost roughly 570,000 jobs.

At first glance, these numbers suggest that healthcare is a growth engine in an otherwise slowing labor market. But a closer look reveals something more troubling for patients and healthcare professionals.

Keep ReadingShow less
A large group of people is depicted while invisible systems actively scan and analyze individuals within the crowd

Anthropic’s lawsuit against the Trump administration over a Pentagon “supply-chain risk” label raises major constitutional questions about AI policy, corporate speech, and political retaliation.

Getty Images, Flavio Coelho

Anthropic Sues Trump Over ‘Unlawful’ AI Retaliation

Anthropic’s dispute with the Trump administration is no longer just about AI policy; it has escalated into a constitutional test of whether American companies can uphold their values against political retaliation. After the administration labeled Anthropic a “supply‑chain risk”, a designation historically reserved for foreign adversaries, and ordered federal agencies to cease using its technology, the company did not yield. Instead, Anthropic filed two lawsuits: one in the Northern District of California and another in the D.C. Circuit, each challenging different aspects of the government’s actions and calling them “unprecedented and unlawful.”

The Pentagon has now formally issued the supply‑chain risk designation, triggering immediate cancellations of federal contracts and jeopardizing “hundreds of millions of dollars” in near‑term revenue. Anthropic’s filings describe the losses as “unrecoverable,” with reputational damage compounding the financial harm. Yet even as the government blacklists the company, the Pentagon continues using Claude in classified systems because the model is deeply embedded in wartime workflows. This contradiction underscores the political nature of the designation: a tool deemed too “dangerous” to be used by federal agencies is simultaneously indispensable in active military operations.

Keep ReadingShow less