While we don’t know how the justices will rule in Merrill v. Milligan, there are a number of ways the U.S. Supreme Court could undermine Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. We outline a few of potential outcomes.
To undermine federal voting laws, conservatives argue that private individuals or organizations cannot bring lawsuits under them. If courts embrace this theory, the power of voting protections would be greatly diminished.
There is one voting policy area where proposed legislation has been overwhelmingly positive: improving felony disenfranchisement laws. As of Feb. 20, at least 68 bills have been introduced in 19 states to restore voting rights.
This spring, Wisconsin will elect its newest justice to the Wisconsin Supreme Court, determining control of the court. We spoke to the two liberal candidates in the race about voting, redistricting and democracy.
The struggle for voting rights in the United States is marred by violence and terror, but voter intimidation is not a relic of the past. Since 2020, there have been a few high profile examples of voter intimidation.
Community Success Initiative v. Moore, an ongoing lawsuit challenging North Carolina’s felony disenfranchisement law, will now meet its fate before the North Carolina Supreme Court. Here’s how we got here.
Minnesota’s Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party is ready to use its new trifecta control to improve voting access, already introducing a major package of pro-voting reforms, the Democracy for the People Act.
Arizona, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin were the top three states with the most voting and elections litigation in 2022, illustrating the competing priorities of groups looking to shape election policy through the courts.
Litigation moves slowly, so challenges to voter suppression laws and gerrymandered maps from previous years will have major updates in 2023. Here’s what to expect in courtrooms across the country.
Since a short U.S. Supreme Court order in 2006, the Purcell principle has spiraled out of control. In 2022, a shallow invocation of “confusion” has been used to uphold gerrymandered maps and unconstitutional voting restrictions.