Ballot Measures, Legislation & Rulemaking Arizona A new initiative seeks to ask Arizona voters whether they want to constitutionally preserve the right used by nearly 90% of them to vote early and even to drop off their ballots on Election Day. A petition drive has been launched by a group calling itself Protect the Vote Arizona that seeks to put a provision in the Arizona Constitution saying there is a “fundamental right” to be able to vote early as well as vote on Election Day. And that, according to Stacy Pearson, whose Lumen Strategies is managing the campaign, includes not just showing up in person to cast a ballot but also dropping off what the ballots that were mailed to their homes. What it also would cement into the constitution is that the right to vote early can be exercised “without providing a reason or excuse.”
Arizona could permanently move up its state primary election date under an advancing legislative proposal that would also give voters more time to fix signature problems on early ballots and codify where party observers may watch election activity. The House voted unanimously Monday to pass the legislation, which would move the primary from the first Tuesday in August to the second-to-last Tuesday in July. That would ensure that election officials can meet federally mandated deadlines to send out general election ballots to military and overseas voters, even if a statewide recount delays the finalization of the primary results. If the bill also passes the Arizona Senate and is signed by Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs, the 2026 primary election date would move from Aug. 4 to July 21. The legislation passed the House after its sponsor — Republican Rep. Alexander Kolodin — offered a floor amendment that would reextend the ballot curing period.
Independence County, Arkansas: Noting a recent Arkansas Supreme Court decision, Independence County officials say voters heading to the polls on March 3 will use electronic voting machines, despite approving an ordinance 14 months ago requiring hand-marked, hand-counted paper ballots. The Independence County Quorum Court voted Dec. 11, 2025, to repeal Ordinance 2024-18, which county voters approved 8,309 to 5,184 in November 2024. Arkansas law allows a quorum court to repeal voter-approved measures with a two-thirds supermajority vote. “An Arkansas Supreme Court ruling on the process of petition gathering placed Independence County in a posture of being on the wrong side of the Arkansas Constitution. Therefore, the Quorum Court JPs voted, with a supermajority, to return the election process to the same as before,” Independence County Judge Kevin Jeffery said on Wednesday. In a Feb. 4 press release county officials cited an Arkansas Supreme Court ruling issued after the 2024 election. The October decision in Evans v. Harrison determined that county initiative petitions must be filed between 60 and 90 days before an election under the Arkansas Constitution. “A recent ruling by the Arkansas Supreme Court found the 2024 paper ballot issue was outside the legal parameters as detailed by the Arkansas Constitution,” Jeffery told White River Now. “The Justices of the Peace expressed the need to uphold their Oath of Office to uphold the Arkansas Constitution. This action by the Quorum Court did not bring into question the legality of any ballot method, but rather upheld the Supreme Court ruling that proper procedure wasn’t followed during the initiative petition process.”
Florida: A bill to impose heightened requirements for first-time voters, including mandating presentation of documents such as a U.S. passport or birth certificate — received its first hearing in this year’s legislative session, and was approved by a party-line vote in the Senate Ethics and Elections Committee. The proposal (SB 1334) is sponsored by Sen. Erin Grall, R-Vero Beach. It would make a number of revisions to election laws, but by far the most contentious would require a voter to provide specific documents to prove he or she a U.S. citizen if records from the Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles (DHSMV) indicate that they are not. Grall says that only voters who lack a driver’s license that is REAL ID-compliant would have to prove their citizenship. (A 2005 federal law called the REAL ID Act requires standardized driver’s licenses and ID cards to be issued by all U.S. states). She later said that 99% of Floridians are already REAL ID-compliant. Among the documents the bill would deem acceptable to prove citizenship are: An original or certified copy of a birth certificate; A valid unexpired passport; A naturalization certificate issued by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security; A Consular Report of Birth Abroad provided by the U.S. Department of State; A current and valid Florida driver license or Florida ID card — if that card indicates U.S. citizenship; A current and valid photo identification issued by the federal government or the state which indicates U.S. citizenship; or An order from a federal court granting U.S. citizenship.
A bill that would require the state to develop and maintain a centralized database to help individuals with felony convictions determine whether they are eligible for restoration of voting rights quickly passed its second committee stop in the state Senate. The proposal (SB 132), sponsored by Sen. Tina Polsky, D-Boca Raton, has been pushed by voting rights advocates for years after more than 65% of Floridians approved Amendment 4 in 2018, which automatically restored the voting rights for individuals who had completed their sentences. The Legislature then passed an implementing bill during the 2019 session that added the requirement that those returning citizens must pay off all their legal financial obligations to fully restore their voting rights. That substantially reduced the number of people with felony convictions able to vote immediately — and ultimately resulted in some of those individuals being arrested after believing that they were eligible to vote when they still weren’t. Polsky’s bill would require the Florida Commission on Offender Review to create a website no later than July 1, 2029, to provide individuals who have been disqualified from voting based on a felony conviction (other than murder or a felony sexual offense) “clear instructions” about getting their voting rights restored and registering to vote. The measure was passed unanimously in the Senate Appropriations Committee on Criminal and Civil Justice, and now moves to the Senate Fiscal Policy Committee, its last stop before hitting the floor.
Legislation to impose firm deadlines on when the governor must call special elections — a move that would prevent long stretches of unfilled seats and ensure consistent representation for voters — just cleared its first Senate hurdle. The Senate Ethics and Elections Committee voted 8-0 for the measure (SB 460) by Boca Raton Democratic Sen. Tina Scott Polsky, who said it’s necessary to address an “inconsistency” in Florida’s electoral process. While the Governor is required to order special elections when vacancies occur in the U.S. House and Florida Legislature, current law does not set deadlines for when those elections must be scheduled.
Georgia: Republican lawmakers are moving to rework how the state conducts its elections in advance of a crucial midterm election. Under a draft House proposal obtained by The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Georgians would have two in-person voting options for casting their ballot. Election Day voters would use hand-marked paper ballots, which would be tabulated by machines. Georgians voting early would be able to choose to fill out a ballot by hand or select their candidates using the current touchscreen system, which prints out a paper ballot receipt. Touchscreen votes would be hand-counted. The proposal was expected to be considered in the House Governmental Affairs Committee on February 2, but the meeting was called off after the proposal’s language immediately sparked controversy among local election officials and Democrats. State Rep. Saira Draper, D-Atlanta, condemned the proposal, saying it would make it “easier to cheat and harder to vote.” Athens-Clarke County Elections Board Chair Rocky Raffle called it a “half-formed proposal aimed at fixing an elections process that is not broken.” The committee’s chair, state Rep. Victor Anderson, R-Cornelia, said “new information was brought to light about a potential solution for Georgia’s elections.” “Out of an abundance of caution, we are taking the necessary time to vet this idea and ensure Georgia voters get the transparency, integrity and security they deserve from our elections procedures,” he said. The committee was expected to consider the draft measure, likely by gutting an existing bill and replacing it with the new provisions. Under the draft proposal, unofficial early voting results from touchscreens would be counted using QR codes printed on ballot receipts for quick results and would later be counted by hand for an official tabulation. It’s unclear how much a new hybrid system would cost under the measure. The Election Day paper ballots would either be preprinted or printed by ballot-on-demand printers.
Senators passed a resolution urging the Secretary of State’s Office to turn over the state’s voter registration list to the U.S. Department of Justice. “Today, all we are doing is urging an elected official to do what Georgia law says he should do. That’s all,” said Sen. Randy Robertson, R-District 29. The resolution passed in a 31–22 vote. The Secretary of State’s Office pushed back on the resolution, implying it conflicts with state law. In a statement, Secretary Brad Raffensperger said in part, “This office will not violate state law, and state law is very clear. I urge state and federal lawmakers to focus on strengthening state administration of elections rather than rehashing the same outdated claims — or worse — moving to federalize a core function of state government.”
A House study committee looking at election procedures in the Peach State submitted its final report this week, including recommendations on how to comply with a provision of state law taking effect this year on ballot QR codes and one advocating for a new statewide voting system. The Blue-Ribbon Study Committee on Election Procedures met six times last year. The committee was chaired by state Representative Tim Fleming, a Covington Republican who is running for secretary of state this year. The final report, which you can find at the bottom of this story, made three recommendations:
That the committee’s existence be extended through the end of this year so that it may continue meeting and offering further recommendations; that the state legislature should “adopt legislation during the 2026 session to provide for the procurement of Georgia’s next statewide voting system;” that the General Assembly should adopt legislation allowing voters to “utilize pre-printed, hand-marked paper ballots on Election Day, beginning with the 2026 General Election.” The report represents the committee’s recommendations. For its election procedure suggestions to go into effect, the Georgia General Assembly would have to pass legislation installing the recommendations into state law.
Illinois: Rev. Jesse Jackson, Sr., is a trailblazer, pioneer and icon who fights for voter rights and democracy, and a new bill seeks to honor his legacy in a unique way. House Bill 4339 is known as the Jesse Jackson, Sr., Young Voter Empowerment Law, and if passed it would require Illinois high schools to provide students with opportunities to register to vote. Participation on the part of students is voluntary, and the bill explicitly prevents partisan organizations from getting involved, making it a neutral and student-centered experience. “We’re not telling students who to vote for or what to vote for. We’re just asking them to register to vote,” said State Rep. Kimberly DuBuclet, one of the lawmakers who introduced the bill. State Senator Robert Peters is the bill’s co-sponsor. “We want to make sure young people understand the process, how government works for them,” he said.
Iowa: A bill proposing changes to satellite voting in Iowa is advancing in the Iowa House. Senate File 140 would restrict schools from serving as satellite absentee voting stations if they have items on the ballot. If approved, county election commissioners would be required to reject requests to establish satellite absentee voting stations on school property. The proposal will go to a full state government committee for further discussion.
A bill regulating elections in Iowa is advancing in the House. House Study Bill 627 would require any agency investigating an election to notify state leaders. It would also require a person’s voter registration that is incomplete or pending to be canceled if county elections leaders aren’t able to verify their information and complete the registration. The bill advanced through a House subcommittee Wednesday and could be taken up by the full committee next.
Kansas: A Senate bill endorsed by the Secretary of State’s Office would end advanced voting by mail if a court strikes down state law requiring election officials to verify a voter’s signature. The prospect of such a ruling is playing out in Shawnee County District Court, where voting rights groups argue the signature verification process is unequally applied from one county to another, leading to the disenfranchisement of lawful, qualified voters. The Kansas Attorney General’s Office, which is tasked with defending the state law, relied on the artificial intelligence platform ChatGPT for assistance with at least one of its legal briefs in defense of that lawsuit. Clay Barker, general counsel for the Secretary of State’s Office, told a Senate committee that Senate Bill 394 would allow the Legislature to “lay down a line” that says signature verification is such an integral part of voting by mail that the two can’t be separated. “It sets legislative intent to unambiguously establish with certainty and beyond dispute the signature verification is not severable because it’s intertwined with everything — the application, the ballot, you can’t even open the envelope until the signature is verified,” Barker said to the Senate Federal and State Affairs Committee. Kansas has required a form of signature verification for mail ballots since 1995. Under state law, voters sign the mail ballot envelope, and local election officials have to verify that the signature on the envelope matches the one on the voter registration file. If there appears to be a discrepancy, the election office has to attempt to contact the voter, who could bring a photo ID to the election office to resolve the matter. Barker said there were 300,000 mail ballots returned in 2022 and 2024, and just 224 were rejected because a signature posed a concern and the voter didn’t “come back and cure it.”
Missouri: Missourians on parole and probation cannot vote until their sentence is completed, unless the person participated in an election-related crime. Because of this, the more than 50,000 people in Missouri on parole or probation currently don’t have the right to vote. Both Republican and Democratic state lawmakers are proposing legislation to change that. State Rep. Kimberly Ann Collins, D-St. Louis, is sponsoring House Bill 2834, which “restores voting rights to individuals on probation or parole.” She said a motivating factor for her is one of her constituents, Bobby Bostic. He was sentenced to 241 years in prison at 16 years old. He was released on parole after being incarcerated for 27 years, and is not eligible to vote. Now, Collins said he is a “good productive citizen” who pays taxes and is “giving back every day,” and serves as an example of someone who would be affected by this bill. On the other side of the aisle, state Rep. Melanie Stinnett, R-Springfield, is sponsoring a similar bill. Stinnett spoke of an experience with her constituent that she says has affected her. She said a man explained to her how hard it has been for him to not be able to vote. “That really impacted me, it was something that influenced my decision to file a bill like this. This was actually the first bill I ever pre filed as a legislator because of how impactful that experience was with that constituent,” Stinnett said. A third bill was addressed in the hearing, House Bill 2787. This bill was sponsored by state Rep. Marlon Anderson, D-St. Louis. The House Corrections and Public Institutions Committee will now make recommendations and decide if it will send the bills to the House floor for a vote.
Nebraska: The Government, Military and Veterans Affairs Committee advanced a proposed amendment that would change one word to two in the Nebraska Constitution about only citizens voting in elections. Citizens are the only voters allowed already under the state constitution and state law. The Nebraska Constitution gives voting rights to “every” eligible U.S. citizen at least 18 years old in accordance with other sections of law. Legislative Resolution 283CA, from State Sen. Barry DeKay of Niobrara, would change the word “every” in Article VI, Section 1 to “only a” citizen could vote. Multiple members of the Committee acknowledged little change either way under DeKay’s proposal and affirmed that noncitizens are not voting in Nebraska elections. The committee advanced the bill to the full Legislature, splitting 5-3 along ideological lines. All five Republicans voted in favor. State Sen. Dunixi Gureca of Omaha, a Democrat, confirmed his opposition via text to the Nebraska Examiner. He was presenting a bill in another hearing at the time of the vote.
South Dakota: Doubts about a person’s citizenship status could be used to challenge their right to vote in South Dakota, if a proposal approved by a legislative committee becomes law. A person initiating a challenge would have to be registered to vote in the same county as the person being challenged. South Dakota’s secretary of state or a local county auditor’s office could also raise a challenge. The challenge would have to be filed with the county auditor at least 90 days before an election. The Secretary of State’s Office, which oversees elections in South Dakota, requested the bill . There are no specifics in the bill about what kind of proof a person would need to disprove another person’s citizenship. Deadrick gave examples that ranged from a copy of a person’s immigration visa to a sworn statement concerning a conversation about citizenship. Sen. Liz Larson, D-Sioux Falls, was the only Senate State Affairs Committee member to vote against the measure. She raised concerns about what evidence or proof is needed to challenge a person’s vote and whether the state should give everyday citizens that authority.
House Bill 10-95 is in response to codified law passed by the Legislature last session that combined all the municipal, school and county elections to the same day in South Dakota. Many election officials testified to the House State Affairs Committee that the updated election schedule has created some inconsistencies in the dates between cities, schools and counties. Proponents say the bill creates consistency. However, Kathy Glines, who’s the Harding County Auditor, said another issue is at stake this year. “There’s a 99.99% chance we won’t meet the deadlines this year for the June election,” Glines said, adding that it was disturbing at the bill’s initial hearing on Jan. 28. This election cycle creates more challenges for election staff. Under current law, candidate hopefuls for statewide elections and state Legislature races must submit nominating petitions by the last Tuesday in March. This year there are five Tuesdays in March, and the deadline falls on March 31 and would give county auditors 15 days to have ballots in-hand ahead of absentee voting for the June primary. Good Friday and the Monday following Easter are during that timeframe as well, which the Secretary of State’s Office said could create additional complications. County auditors are mandated by law to have the ballots ready for absentee by a certain date. Thomas Oliva is the Hughes County Auditor and told the committee he’s not entirely sure about what the penalties are for not reaching deadlines. Rep. Rebecca Reimer brought HB 1095 to address the unique challenges the 2026 election poses. It changes the date to the third Tuesday in March, up two weeks for 2026.
A bill that could help produce election results sooner in South Dakota’s more-populated counties passed unanimously in the state Senate State Affairs Committee. Senate Bill 171 advances to the full Senate on a 9-0 vote. The bill allows county auditors to verify and open absentee ballots on the Monday before a Tuesday election. The bill does not allow absentee votes to be counted on that Monday. The bill’s prime sponsor is Republican Sen. Sue Peterson of Lincoln and Minnehaha counties.
Utah: Voting rights advocates have long advocated an easy way to get more Americans to the polls: make Election Day a holiday. But without federal action to ensure voters get time away from work to cast a ballot, Utah lawmakers are advancing a bill to add it to state calendars. And although the bill would primarily result in a day off for public employees, Utah law already requires private employers to ensure workers are given adequate time to vote. If the proposal from Rep. Ryan Wilcox, R-Ogden, passes, Utah would join five states that both recognize Election Day as a holiday and mandate paid time off, if needed, for voting. The House Government and Operations Committee unanimously voted last week to approve the bill, which will now be heard by the full House chamber. “We’ll do everything we can to encourage folks to vote,” Wilcox said, “and we’ve heard from a number of private folks that would love to have a nudge or an excuse to do that — to give their folks some extra time.”
Virginia: House Bill 640 would change how voter eligibility challenges are handled in Virginia elections by removing the ability for voters to raise challenges at polling places or through local general registrars. Instead, all challenges would be required to proceed through the state’s circuit courts. The bill, sponsored by Del. Paul E. Krizek, D–16, was prefiled Jan. 13 and introduced Jan. 14. It was assigned to the House Privileges and Elections Committee, where it advanced through the Voting Rights Subcommittee on a 6–2 vote on Jan. 28. The full committee reported the bill with a substitute on Jan. 30 by a 15–7 vote. It has not yet received a vote on the House floor. Under current Virginia law, a voter may challenge another voter’s eligibility at the polling place, and three voters may challenge a registration through the local general registrar. Those challenges are handled administratively, often by pollworkers or registrars, and can sometimes be resolved the same day, including on Election Day. HB640 would eliminate both of those processes. Under the proposal, three qualified voters would be required to file a petition in circuit court challenging a voter’s eligibility. The challenged voter would receive notice, and a judge would decide the matter. Any appeal would be filed directly with the Court of Appeals of Virginia on a priority basis.
Washington: High schools could soon be required to offer coursework teaching students how to write a signature in cursive under a bill heard in the House Education Committee. The bill would add lessons on making official cursive signatures to current mandatory high school civics classes. It would also require lessons on what official signatures are used for in government and elections. The proposal isn’t about crafting art or good penmanship. It’s focused on preparing teens to vote. In Washington’s vote-by-mail system, a signature is required and if it differs from the signature on file, the ballot gets rejected. Studies have shown that younger voters tend to get their signature rejected more often because they haven’t solidified a regular signature. In addition, the Secretary of State’s Office would have to include in its odd-year voter survey mismatched signatures by age group. The bill was sponsored by Rep. April Connors, R-Kennewick, who said her own observations on youth using cursive were concerning. “It’s not necessarily a cursive bill, but a lot of us sign our signatures in cursive,” she said. “It’s hard because the kids aren’t learning.” She argued the bill would decrease the number of ballots getting challenged during elections by young voters.
West Virginia: A newly introduced bill in the Legislature would dramatically change how elections are conducted across the state. House Bill 4935, introduced during the 2026 Regular Session by Delegate Dillon, proposes requiring paper ballots in all elections, banning electronic voting systems entirely, and mandating that voters present a government-issued photo ID in order to cast a ballot. Under the bill, every vote in West Virginia would be cast on paper and hand-counted, ending the use of electronic voting machines, ballot scanners, and other digital tabulation systems currently allowed under state law. The legislation repeals the entire section of state code that authorizes and regulates electronic voting systems, effectively removing them from all state, county, and municipal elections. In addition to eliminating electronic voting, the proposal would require voters to show a government-issued photographic identification card before being allowed to vote. The bill does not outline alternative options for voters without photo ID.
The Senate passed a bill tightening rules on how ballots are accepted and counted, approving the measure after debate over whether the changes would protect election integrity or risk disenfranchising voters. The committee substitute for Senate Bill 61 would amend state law to prohibit counting ballots cast in a manner not authorized by law, including ballots cast in the incorrect precinct. It would also bar election officials from counting provisional ballots on election day and remove discretion currently held by county commissions to overlook certain ballot errors. Sen. Tom Willis, R-Berkeley, chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said the bill is intended to strengthen election integrity and ensure votes are cast only in races for which voters are legally eligible.
A proposed bill that would eliminate nonpartisan elections for mayor and city council positions by 2032 has been pulled from a House Judiciary Committee agenda but continues to stir discussion in Charleston. Introduced by District 3 State Delegate Jimmy Willis, the bill would also prevent mayors from being appointed except to fill vacancies. Currently, most of the 230 incorporated cities in West Virginia conduct nonpartisan elections for these roles.
A bill introduced by Sen. Eric Tarr (R-Putnam) and Sen. Darren Thorne (R-Hampshire) put explicit criminal penalties on casting ballots in the wrong district. The Senate Judiciary Committee revised the bill, adding “with the intent to commit fraud” to its provisions on violations. However, Sen. Joey Garcia (D-Marion) says the legislation could unfairly target the elderly and first-time voters. “We already have a process to make sure that if somebody is not supposed to vote, they’re not going to vote. Their ballot will not be cast,” Garcia says. “And I think that’s something where the opposing view on this was that they may vote the wrong ballot, but I don’t see any proof that that wouldn’t be taken into consideration by the county commission either.”
West Virginia law allows a buffer for county election officials to receive absentee ballots through the mail in time for canvassing and counting. But a new law being considered would move that deadline to Election Day, raising concerns about disenfranchising rural and older voters. The House Judiciary Committee spent part of this week considering House Bill 4600, requiring all ballots for primary and general elections to be received no later than the close of polls on Election Day. The committee recommended the bill for passage to the full House of Delegates Wednesday morning. HB 4600 would require that any absentee ballot returned to a local county clerk via the U.S. mail or express shipping must be received by the county clerk’s office by 8 p.m. on the day of the primary or general election. It would apply to standard absentee ballots, military and overseas voters, and ballots submitted electronically. Nationwide: As states begin certifying ballot measures for the 2026 election cycle, Ballotpedia is tracking a growing number of initiatives and constitutional amendments addressing voting requirements, abortion policy, marijuana and psychedelics, and sex, gender, and LGBTQ issues. Voters in multiple states could decide these questions in November 2026, continuing a trend of using ballot measures to resolve high-profile and often contested policy debates.
Legal Updates
Arkansas: Garland County Justice of the Peace Dayton Myers filed a lawsuit last week against the Garland County Election Commission and County Judge Darryl Mahoney. He explained how they’re allowing a polling location to be at his opponent, Robert Louton’s job, Allen Tillery Automobile Dealership. The lawsuit said the polling location is usually at the Hot Springs Mall. Documents allege Mahoney hand-picked the location, saying, “It is understood that the Garland County Judge may have made the recommendation as to a polling place to the Garland County Election Commission.” Mahoney declined to comment. Myers and one of his attorneys, Josh Hurst, said they tried to file an appeal with the Election Commission but were denied, which led to them filing an injunction. He also stressed that all they’re asking for is fairness. “Even the appearance that the Election Commission is showing favoritism to one candidate or the other, or that the polling location is somehow not neutral. It’s not right, and it’s not fair to the voters. They may feel intimidated when they go in to vote to some capacity,” Myers said. “I fully support the decisions made by the Garland County Election Commission and the County Judge. I want to be clear that I am an employee who happens to be on the ballot for Justice of the Peace, District 7. The location currently under scrutiny is in District 4, not in District 7. My office is located at 4573 Central Avenue, Hot Springs, Arkansas. The building where voting will take place is located at 2251 Higdon Ferry Road, Hot Springs, Arkansas. This is a completely separate building from where I work, located approximately 200 yards away. I respect the election process and the officials responsible for ensuring that the process is fair and transparent,” said Louton in a statement.
California: Huntington Beach’s voter identification charter amendment has been denied, after the California Supreme Court declined to hear the city’s appeal last week. In a 2024 special election, Huntington Beach residents passed Measure A, a city charter amendment that would allow the city to check identification in municipal elections beginning this year. But state officials and Huntington Beach resident Mark Bixby have both pushed back on the city, arguing that a voter ID requirement was illegal and infringed on rights. “Today’s victory makes one thing crystal clear: No city in our state, charter and non-charter alike, is above the law,” California Atty. General Rob Bonta said in a statement. “All along, Secretary of State Weber and I have maintained that Huntington Beach’s voter ID policy is illegal, and now, the state’s highest court has weighed in and agreed with us. Measure A won’t be taking effect — ever. Huntington Beach’s leaders have been parroting the Trump Administration’s talking points by questioning the integrity of our elections. In court, the city’s allegations were resoundingly rejected. I remain fully committed to protecting the right to vote from baseless attacks.” Orange County Superior Court Judge Nico Dourbetas ruled in April 2025 that voter ID would not compromise the integrity of a municipal election. A three-judge panel of the state Fourth District Court of Appeal disagreed, however, in a November ruling, stating that the requirement was preempted by elections code that was recently updated. The code was updated after Senate Bill 1174, authored by then-state Sen. Dave Min, passed last year. The City Council unanimously voted in closed session this week to appeal a pair of congruent voter ID lawsuits to the U.S. Supreme Court, City Atty. Mike Vigliotta reported, after the California Supreme Court declined to hear the city’s appeal last week.
Georgia: Officials in Fulton County filed a court challenge this week seeking the return of scores of election records seized by federal agents last week from a warehouse in Fulton County, which has been central to right-wing conspiracy theories about President Donald Trump’s loss in the 2020 presidential election. Robb Pitts, chairman of the Fulton County Board of Commissioners, vowed that county officials would use “every resource” to secure ballots and other material and cast the court fight as part of a broader effort to ensure the future of independent elections. The county’s motion, which was filed under seal in federal court in Atlanta, also asked the judge to unseal the investigative affidavit that agents submitted to secure their search warrant, Pitts said. “Our very Constitution is at stake in this fight,” he said at a news conference, adding later: “This case is not only about Fulton County. It’s about elections across Georgia and across the nation.” Texas: U.S. District Judge Robert Pitman ruled last week that Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton failed to offer “any plausible proof” that Jolt Initiative, a nonprofit that aims to increase civic participation among Latinos, is violating the law. Paxton had filed a lawsuit in state court accusing Jolt of submitting “unlawful voter registration applications,” specifying in a press release that the group was “attempting to register illegals, who are all criminals.” The suit, which seeks to revoke Jolt’s nonprofit charter through a legal mechanism known as a quo warranto petition, was put on ice by Pitman, who said in his ruling that Paxton appears to be operating in bad faith. The attorney general’s case against Jolt “supposes absolutely no wrongdoing,” and indicates that the attorney general may be “harassing [Jolt] and fishing for reasons to investigate its organization.”
Disability Rights Texas filed a class-action lawsuit against Harris County this week alleging its mail-in voting process is inaccessible for visually impaired voters or those with “print disabilities.” An attorney with Disability Rights Texas sued both the county and County Clerk Teneshia Hudspeth in federal court on behalf of the National Federation of the Blind of Texas and four disabled voters. The residents, all of whom are either visually impaired or otherwise incapable of filling out a paper ballot, argued the county’s refusal to offer an electronic alternative forced them to depend on caretakers and loved ones to read and fill out their mail-in ballots. The plaintiffs accused the county of violating both the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, arguing its failure to provide an electronic ballot undermined their ability to independently vote in privacy.
Wisconsin According to Votebeat, the Wisconsin Elections Commission, filing its first ever friend-of-the-court brief, challenged Madison’s controversial legal argument that it should not be financially liable for 193 uncounted ballots in the 2024 presidential election because of a state law that calls absentee voting a privilege, not a right. The argument presented by city officials misunderstands what “privilege” means in the context of absentee voting and “enjoys no support in the constitution or case law,” the commission wrote in its filing Tuesday, echoing a similar rebuke by Gov. Tony Evers last month. “Once an elector has complied with the statutory process, whether absente
NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote! Michael H. Drucker
