The 2020 election year was the most logistically challenging in American history. Last February, just as the presidential primary season began, Covid-19 began spreading like wildfire, upending the rhythm of American life as we knew it. Yet, there was one event that could not be moved — the November general election.
Ultimately, 161 million citizens, the largest number ever, exercised their constitutional right to vote on or before Nov. 3. This historic turnout was a result of states implementing key reforms to the voting process that allowed citizens to receive and cast their ballots safely and securely during a once-in-a-lifetime global pandemic.
Many of these changes should remain in place after the pandemic, including extended periods for early in-person voting, expanded use of absentee ballot drop boxes and no-excuse absentee voting.
However, election officials in states including Texas and Georgia have already announced plans to reverse these changes, even as the country sets records for new coronavirus cases, hospitalizations and deaths. These officials vengefully argue that their voter suppression tactics are necessary to protect against voter fraud, despite the fact that the federal Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency confirmed the most recent election was "the most secure in American history." Rather than work to ensure that all eligible voters can continue to cast their ballots in the easiest and most secure manner possible, these officials are determined to unduly restrict who is able to vote and how.
Fortunately, the new Congress can send the new president two pieces of legislation that can stop these efforts before they begin.
In the last Congress, the Democratic-majority House passed what is now called the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act as well as the For the People Act, which was also known as HR 1. But both of these important measures lay dormant in a Senate controlled by Republicans. Enacting these two bills would ensure that all eligible voters are able to vote seamlessly and restrict state and local jurisdictions from disenfranchising voters in such minority communities as Detroit, Philadelphia and Atlanta — three of the most prominent places where Donald Trump focuses his ire and his baseless allegations after the election.
Voter suppression efforts reached a fever pitch after 2013, when the Supreme Court invalidated the Voting Rights Act's preclearance formula in Shelby County v. Holder. The VRAA, named for the late iconic civil rights leader and Georgia congressman, would create a new formula, which would subject state and local jurisdictions with a history of voting rights violations over the past 25 years to preclearance for a period of 10 years. If a jurisdiction became subject to preclearance, it would be forced to obtain federal approval for changes to its voter ID laws, redistricting processes, voting locations, voting opportunities and voter registration list maintenance if those changes would impact minority communities.
While striking down the previous preclearance formula as unconstitutionally outdated, the Supreme Court said that Congress was free to "draft another formula based on current conditions." However, for almost eight years, Congress has failed to act. The VRAA does exactly that – creating a new formula to address modern-day voter suppression nationwide.
The bill would also expand the circumstances under which a federal court could block discriminatory practices, revise the circumstances under which the Justice Department could assign election observers, and require covered jurisdictions to notify the public of changes to their voting practices. The legislation additionally would prevent state and local jurisdictions from closing polling places and early voting sites in minority neighborhoods.
HR 1, meanwhile, includes essential protections against voter purges, which states like Georgia have repeatedly used to cancel voters' registration simply for not voting. The bill would also require states to modernize their registration processes through automatic voter registration, same-day voter registration and online voter registration. These key reforms would protect voters even if they are improperly purged from the rolls and make it easier for election officials to process registration information.
This legislation would also restore voting rights to people with prior convictions who have completed their sentences. Voter disenfranchisement laws were originally passed in states throughout the South in response to the political power formerly enslaved African Americans achieved during Reconstruction. This bill would re-enfranchise approximately 4.7 million citizens nationwide who are currently prohibited from voting in federal elections.
Powerful legislative leaders in Georgia, Texas, Pennsylvania and Michigan have already placed voter suppression at the top of their agendas for this year. The outgoing president planted seeds of doubt in many Americans' minds about the integrity and sanctity of our elections — and those could easily be transformed into fuel to suppress votes in the next election.
Congress must quickly pass both of these measures so that our new president, Joe Biden, can sign them early in his tenure. Doing so is vital for shielding Americans from the inevitable attacks on their right to vote that are on the horizon.




















A golden tray sits on the Resolute Desk as President Donald Trump speaks during an announcement on American nuclear innovation in the Oval Office at the White House on July 24, 2026, in Washington, D.C. Trump is signing multiple executive orders targeting the nuclear energy sector and easing rules for new reactors and nuclear fuel supply chains.
Trump’s hubris rivals the fallen heroes of ancient Greek mythology
In January, the New York Times asked President Donald Trump if there were any limits on his global powers.
“Yeah,” the president responded, “there is one thing. My own morality. My own mind. It’s the only thing that can stop me.”
That was eight months ago, but fortunately Christopher Nolan’s blockbuster adaptation of “The Odyssey” has made ancient Greek literature newly relevant. Before that window closes, I’d like to talk about hubris.
Today, the term mostly means excessive pride or arrogance. That’s part of what the Greeks meant by it too, but the meaning was a bit richer and more specific. Hubris was an insolent or outrageous act that offended the gods, often because the transgressor was claiming abilities or authorities that solely belonged to supreme beings.
Nolan renamed and slightly modified the concept of xenia for the film, calling it “Zeus’ law.” In the director’s telling, mortals should follow the rules laid out by the gods, specifically the requirement to treat strangers with respect lest they be gods in disguise.
In a sense, hubris is the opposite, or at least the rejection, of xenia. The hubris of the suitors, and at times Odysseus himself, invites punishment by the gods and their mortal instruments.
Which brings me back to Donald Trump. His claim that there are no constraints on his personal power to dictate events on the global stage was one of the greatest expressions of hubris ever uttered by a political leader.
Trump’s claim was obviously false when he made it.
He vowed that he could end the Russia-Ukraine war in 24 hours. He’s proved powerless to make that happen. If he had divine powers to work his will, why would he have balked at implementing his tariffs so often that Wall Street adopted the “TACO trade” term for his deals? “TACO” stands for “Trump always chickens out.”
And why would Trump have made so many embarrassing concessions to China — from rescinding tariffs on Chinese goods to allowing them to buy crucial and incredibly valuable computer chips?
But Trump saw his success at capturing Venezuelan strongman Nicolas Maduro as proof of his ability to launch missiles to the same effect as Zeus’ lightning bolts. Trump believed he was the most powerful man who ever lived.
This is no exaggeration. In March, when the Iran invasion seemed successful, Trump gave a document penned by“Presidential Historian David King” to New York Times reporters Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan purporting to prove that Trump was “the most powerful person to have EVER walked this planet.” King was, in fact, a businessman and occasional caddy for legendary golfer Gary Player.
King compared Trump favorably to many of history’s most powerful, and often heinous, figures: Alexander the Great, Attila the Hun, William the Conqueror, Napoleon Bonaparte, Joseph Stalin, Genghis Khan, Mao Tse Tung, Adolf Hitler and Vladimir Lenin. Many of these men thought they were the most powerful person in the world, too. And many were defeated precisely because they believed it.
At least Napoleon and Hitler had a string of truly impressive victories before they learned the folly of hubris. The limits on Trump’s power have been exposed by far less august forces than the combined might of the allies in World War II or the fearsome Russian winter.
Iran is a comparatively middling power. But the regime’s ability to absorb punishment while imposing its will on the Strait of Hormuz has proved to be a greater constraint on Trump’s power than his morality or mind. We should note that, at least rhetorically, his morality has not proved much of a constraint. He has repeatedly promised to destroy Iranian “civilization” if the regime refuses to capitulate.
But they haven’t — and won’t anytime soon — because the regime’s tolerance for pain far outstrips Trump’s. The combined fear of skyrocketing oil prices, outrage of Gulf state potentates, diminishing weapon supplies and domestic unpopularity is doing the work that international law, congressional oversight and the collective opinion of foreign policy experts can’t or won’t do.
If I considered Trump more heroic than reason and facts could allow, I would say his Sisyphean predicament has the whiff of Greek tragedy to it. Trump is vexed by the fact that the Iranians won’t honor deals or ratify his countless premature claims of victory — giving new meaning to his vow that his presidency would make people tired of winning. It’s almost like they’re out-Trumping Trump.
Things might have gone better if he’d heeded that great Greek tragedian Sophocles: “For Zeus utterly abhors the boasts of a proud tongue.”
____
Jonah Goldberg is editor-in-chief of The Dispatch and the host of The Remnant podcast. His Twitter handle is @JonahDispatch.