Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Democrats to spend more than $10M suing for voting rights in purple states

vote by mail

Democratic campaign committees are funding lawsuits challenging a variety of voter suppression tactics including rejection of mailed-in absentee ballots.

Bill Oxford/Getty Images

In recent years, competition between the Democratic and Republican parties to gain a tactical edge in elections has centered on technology — who had the most sophisticated system for identifying potential voters and getting them to the polls.

This time, though, the leaders of the Democratic congressional campaign organizations have settled on a new strategy: going to court.

The party has gained scattershot headlines in recent months by filing federal lawsuits in mostly purple states, alleging an array of their election laws are unconstitutional voting rights violations or contradict federal law. But the ambitions of this strategy, and the size of the investment, did not become clear until last week.


The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, the two party entities charged with helping elect members of the party to Congress, announced that they were making an "eight-figure investment in a legal strategy across key battleground states."

That means their investment in all the litigation will be at least $10 million, a significant sum but a relative drop in the bucket for campaign organizations that spent a combined $343 million on the 2018 midterms.

Eight states, mostly in the South, have been targeted for litigation so far: Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Michigan, Minnesota, North Carolina, South Carolina and Texas.

Democratic leaders say they are attempting to counter a decades-long voter suppression campaign by Republicans — ideally in time to make it easier for many more of the voters in their base to get to the polls in November.

They are confident that making it easier to register to vote and to cast ballots will generally favor Democratic candidates. Traditionally, African-Americans and other ethnic minorities, who vote overwhelmingly for Democrats, have been disproportionately affected by efforts to prevent people from registering and voting.

The registration lawsuits include one in Texas challenging a law prohibiting the use of electronic signatures on registration forums.

Lawsuits filed about voting methods include one in Georgia to challenge the high rate of rejection of absentee ballots.

And laws that put the names of GOP candidates first on the ballot are being challenged with lawsuits in Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Minnesota and Texas.

The suits already have produced results with, for example, a federal judge ruling the Florida ballot order law, which has favored the GOP for decades, is unconstitutional.

A total of 14 lawsuits were filed in recent months and more are on the way.

So far this election cycle, the DCCC and the DSCC have reported paying the law firm Perkins Coie nearly $900,000 for legal services. The firm is the one that files the voting rights lawsuits.

The party is mounting plausible campaigns for Senate seats in every one of the states where it's filed suits except for Minnesota and Florida, a perpetual battleground that does not have a senator's seat on the ballot this year. It is is defending or targeting almost 30 competitive House districts in the eight states. Every one of them except Minnesota voted for President Trump four years ago, but he's targeted that state this time while the Democrats have aspirations to contest all of the rest (except South Carolina) come November.


Read More

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

Should the U.S. nationalize elections? A constitutional analysis of federalism, the Elections Clause, and the risks of centralized control over voting systems.

Getty Images, SDI Productions

Why Nationalizing Elections Threatens America’s Federalist Design

The Federalism Question: Why Nationalizing Elections Deserves Skepticism

The renewed push to nationalize American elections, presented as a necessary reform to ensure uniformity and fairness, deserves the same skepticism our founders directed toward concentrated federal power. The proposal, though well-intentioned, misunderstands both the constitutional architecture of our republic and the practical wisdom in decentralized governance.

The Constitutional Framework Matters

The Constitution grants states explicit authority over the "Times, Places and Manner" of holding elections, with Congress retaining only the power to "make or alter such Regulations." This was not an oversight by the framers; it was intentional design. The Tenth Amendment reinforces this principle: powers not delegated to the federal government remain with the states and the people. Advocates for nationalization often cite the Elections Clause as justification, but constitutional permission is not constitutional wisdom.

Keep ReadingShow less
Postal Service Changes Mean Texas Voters Shouldn’t Wait To Mail Voter Registrations and Ballots

A voter registration drive in Corpus Christi, Texas, on Oct. 5, 2024. The deadline to register to vote for Texas' March 3 primary election is Feb. 2, 2026. Changes to USPS policies may affect whether a voter registration application is processed on time if it's not postmarked by the deadline.

Gabriel Cárdenas for Votebeat

Postal Service Changes Mean Texas Voters Shouldn’t Wait To Mail Voter Registrations and Ballots

Texans seeking to register to vote or cast a ballot by mail may not want to wait until the last minute, thanks to new guidance from the U.S. Postal Service.

The USPS last month advised that it may not postmark a piece of mail on the same day that it takes possession of it. Postmarks are applied once mail reaches a processing facility, it said, which may not be the same day it’s dropped in a mailbox, for example.

Keep ReadingShow less
Post office trucks parked in a lot.

Changes to USPS postmarking, ranked choice voting fights, costly runoffs, and gerrymandering reveal growing cracks in U.S. election systems.

Photo by Sam LaRussa on Unsplash.

2026 Will See an Increase in Rejected Mail-In Ballots - Here's Why

While the media has kept people’s focus on the Epstein files, Venezuela, or a potential invasion of Greenland, the United States Postal Service adopted a new rule that will have a broad impact on Americans – especially in an election year in which millions of people will vote by mail.

The rule went into effect on Christmas Eve and has largely flown under the radar, with the exception of some local coverage, a report from PBS News, and Independent Voter News. It states that items mailed through USPS will no longer be postmarked on the day it is received.

Keep ReadingShow less
People voting at voting booths.

A little-known interstate compact could change how the U.S. elects presidents by 2028, replacing the Electoral College with the national popular vote.

Getty Images, VIEW press

The Quiet Campaign That Could Rewrite the 2028 Election

Most Americans are unaware, but a quiet campaign in states across the country is moving toward one of the biggest changes in presidential elections since the nation was founded.

A movement called the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC) is happening mostly out of public view and could soon change how the United States picks its president, possibly as early as 2028.

Keep ReadingShow less