Ballot Measures, Legislation & Rulemaking
Federal Legislation: Congressional appropriators announced funding legislation this week that extends an expiring cyber threat information-sharing law and provides $2.6 billion for the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), including money for election security and directives on staffing levels. Under the bill, $39.6 million would go to continuing election security programs, namely election security advisers in each CISA region across the country and the continuation of the Elections Infrastructure Information Sharing and Analysis Center (EI-ISAC). Last spring, the organization that supports the EI-ISAC said it no longer was doing so after the Trump administration terminated funding, with DHS saying the EI-ISAC no longer aligns with its mission.
According to the Desert News, Republican leaders are ramping up efforts to ban noncitizens from voting in federal elections by reviving a bill from Utah Sen. Mike Lee to implement stricter identification requirements. House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-Louisiana) hinted at plans to bolster the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility, or SAVE Act, by adding photo ID requirements in order to cast a ballot. The proposal builds on legislation already introduced by Lee in the Senate that would require proof of U.S. citizenship when registering to vote, a key campaign promise President Donald Trump made during the 2024 election cycle. “What we’re looking at doing is passing an even better bill over to the Senate to give them even more incentive to go protect the sanctity of every American’s vote, and that is the SAVE Act Plus,” Scalise told Fox News over the weekend. “You can’t even get on an airplane. You can’t go to a bar tonight without showing a picture ID. Yet there are people in many states where the states actually have laws saying you can’t show ID, which is a recipe for fraud.” Lee told the Deseret News he is already working with other lawmakers to draft a new “and even stronger” version of the bill, although a timeline is not yet clear. The House passed the SAVE Act last year but it has yet to be considered by the Senate, where it would need substantial support from Democrats to overcome filibuster rules.
Alabama: The House of Representatives passed a bill that would require probate judges to conduct audits after state and county elections. HB 95, sponsored by Joe Lovvorn, R-Auburn, passed on a 72-25 mostly-partly line vote, would require an audit of one contest and one contest, selected at random by a local canvassing board. “It does not change election results. It only checks them or the post audit of the machines at random,” Lovvorn said on the House floor. The Legislative Fiscal Office says that an audit would cost $35,000 per day. House Democrats debated the bill for hours, questioning its expense and necessity and saying it could undermine faith in elections. During the 2025 legislative session former Rep. Debbie Wood, R-Valley, filed a similar bill that passed the House but did not come to a vote in the Senate.
Rep. Jamie Kiel, R-Russellville, has filed a bill that would prohibit the state from selling phone numbers and other personal information from voter rolls for commercial purposes. Current law allows the state to sell all personal information included in voter registration lists, except for Social Security numbers. House Bill 71 would make sure the state is not “complicit” in robocalling and will protect Alabamians’ privacy, he said. The bill has 33 co-sponsors. The bill is expected to get its first vote Wednesday in the House Constitution, Campaigns and Elections Committee. It specifies that the secretary of state also would be forbidden from releasing emails, months and days of birth and voter ID and driver license numbers. Authorized government agencies at the local, federal and state level would still be able to access this confidential information.
Arizona: Secretary of State Adrian Fontes announced new legislation that would seek to improve voting access and provide funding to improve the cybersecurity of state and county election systems. During a press conference, Fontes called the legislation, called the Voters First Act, a “research-based, common-sense proposal to modernize, standardize and prioritize the voting process across all 15 counties in Arizona.” The act, which was introduced by Democratic party leaders in both houses this week, includes statewide restoration of Arizona’s permanent early vote list, which allows voters to receive ballots by mail for early voting, and applies the state’s 75-foot “voter protection zone” to ballot drop boxes and voting locations. It would extend the early voting period, allow the state to accept private grant funding to educate the public about the basic facts of statewide elections and allow ballots to be collected and processed continually on election day, for faster results. The act would provide $1 million from state general funds to the secretary of state’s office, at least half of which would be used to purchase equipment for voting centers. Funds would also be provided for mandatory participation in a “multistate electronic voter registration information center.” Though the bill does not name a particular organization. The remainder of that funding would be used to improve the state’s ballot tracking system and provide members of the public with text notifications when their ballots have been counted. An additional $1 million from the state general fund would pay for improvements to state and county technology and cybersecurity programs.
Arkansas: Arkansas lawmakers are preparing to implement new rules that more clearly define what authorized poll watchers can — and cannot — do inside polling places. Chris Madison, director of the Arkansas State Board of Election Commissioners, said the changes are designed to reduce confusion and prevent conflicts that surfaced during the last election cycle. The updated rules were approved by the Arkansas Legislative Council’s Administrative Rules Subcommittee and are headed to the full Arkansas Legislative Council for final consideration. At the center of the revisions is where poll watchers may stand and what they are permitted to observe. Under the previous standard, poll watchers could position themselves close enough to hear voters’ names as they checked in. The new language adds that poll watchers will be allowed to stand close enough to watch how the polling site functions and may move around the location to observe procedures as they occur. The rules also draw a sharper line around voter privacy. Poll watchers may not be within six feet of a voter while that voter is casting a ballot. They also may not place themselves in any position where they can see how someone votes. In addition to physical boundaries, the updated rules spell out the role of a poll watcher. The guidance emphasizes that poll watchers are present to observe — not to “police” poll workers. Instead, the rules outline how concerns should be raised and who should be contacted if a watcher believes an issue is not being addressed appropriately.
Indiana: A bill banning ranked choice voting in Indiana, which the state doesn’t utilize as a voting method, passed out of the Senate this week. Senate Bill 12, authored by State Sen. Blake Doriot, R-Goshen, states that an election may not be decided by ranked choice voting. During the third reading discussion of the bill, Doriot said that Indiana doesn’t use ranked choice voting. The process is confusing, especially for the elderly, first-time voters and people with a language barrier, Doriot said. State Sen. Andrea Hunley, D-Indianapolis, offered an amendment to the bill when it was heard on second reading last week that would’ve formed a committee to study the impacts of ranked choice voting in Indiana. The bill passed 38-9 Tuesday. It will move on for consideration by the House.
Kansas: An aide to the secretary of state warned lawmakers this week that moving all local elections to even-numbered years, so that candidates for city, county and school board seats appear on the same ballot as candidates for president or governor, would have consequences for voters and election officials. The proposal is among numerous changes to election law sought by Rep. Pat Proctor, a Leavenworth Republican who chairs the House Elections Committee and is running for the GOP nomination for secretary of state, which administers elections. Proctor said moving elections to even-numbered years would improve voter turnout, which a voting rights advocate pointed out was at odds with Proctor’s record of making it more difficult to participate in elections. Clay Barker, general counsel for the Secretary of State’s office, said during a hearing before Proctor’s committee that combining elections would “exponentially increase” the number of ballot versions printed, to account for the boundary lines of small offices, such as school board seats and drainage districts. He also said the ballots would be much longer, costing more to print and leading to longer lines at the polls as voters take more time to fill them out. If passed, the law would take effect in 2028.
Mississippi: As the U.S. Supreme Court weighs a case that could further weaken the federal Voting Rights Act, some Mississippi lawmakers are moving to write their own version. State lawmakers in the Legislative Black Caucus on Martin Luther King Jr. Day filed legislation to create a state-level version of the Voting Rights Act. They said their act is designed to safeguard minority voting rights, as the nation’s highest court has indicated it’s open to revisit provisions of the Civil Rights era federal law and has already overturned some. The state legislation would prohibit dilution of minority voters, create a Mississippi Voting Rights Commission and require some jurisdictions to obtain preclearance approval from the newly created commission. The bill would be named the Robert G. Clark Jr. Voting Rights Act, in honor of Clark, who in 1967 became the first Black Mississippian elected to the state Legislature in the modern era. Clark was ostracized when first elected to the House and sat at a desk by himself without the traditional deskmates that other House members had. But he became a respected legislative leader.
Missouri: A wide-ranging elections bill would restore Missouri’s presidential primary and lengthen the time that voters can cast an absentee ballot in-person without and excuse. It’s sponsored by State Rep. Peggy McGaugh, R-Carroll County. McGaugh, a former county clerk, described the decision to replace the primary with party caucuses a few years ago as a mistake. McGaugh’s bill would also expand Missouri’s no-excuse absentee voting period from two to four weeks. She said feedback from county clerks in larger counties suggested strong support for expanding the no-excuse voting period. Other provision in the bill include: Requires that automatic tabulating equipment be tested no later than a week before an election; Requires that lists of absentee ballot applications from people with permanent disabilities be kept confidential and not be publicly displayed; Allows provisional ballots to be cast in any public election; and Bans electioneering, exit polling, surveying, and sampling within 50 feet of a polling place on Election Day (current law bans them within 25 feet).
Ohio: Ohio Democratic lawmakers have proposed legislation to make Election Day a state holiday. The state’s voter turnout varies per election, ranging from 70% for the 2024 presidential election to 10% in 2025. State Sen. Kent Smith, D-Euclid, proposed a solution. “If elected officials in Ohio really respect voters, we should respect them enough to allow them to get to the ballot on election day,” Smith said in an interview. He introduced, alongside several Democratic colleagues, Ohio Senate Bill 335, which would make a general election a public holiday. The first Tuesday after the first Monday in November would be “Democracy Day.” “Holidays are considered special days, and that’s one of the things that I think we need to always be doing — trying to educate the young people in Ohio about the importance of voting,” the lawmaker said. The bill will be heard in the coming months, and Smith is confident that, despite the legislature having a GOP supermajority, his idea is bipartisan and can succeed.
Oklahoma: Just like last year, multiple bills aim to make changes to the in-person absentee voting process. Two bills filed this session hope to reduce the chaos of early voting. OKC-based Senate Minority Leader Julia Kirt’s Senate Bill 1362 would add Saturday from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. as an early voting day for all elections run by county election boards. Fellow Senate Democrat Mary Boren of Norman filed Senate Bill 1384, which would establish the In-Person Absentee Voting Expansion Grant Program. The initiative would create funds for additional early voting sites during even-year statewide elections every other November. Measures to increase early voting options stalled in committee last session, so it remains to be seen whether these tweaked efforts get more traction.
With Senate Bill 1351, Republican Micheal Bergstrom of Adair wants to prevent people who have never had a permanent home in the United States from voting in Oklahoma. The measure deals with the legal issue of domicile, which is different from the concept of residency. Domicile refers to establishing a permanent home in a certain nation or state, while residency is about physical presence. Although the two are often intertwined, an individual could hypothetically reside in Oklahoma but not domicile here if they were from another country and planned to move back in the near future, meaning they may still retain bank accounts and tax responsibilities in their home nation. Bergstrom’s proposal would prevent individuals who have never domiciled in the United States from voting in Oklahoma, even if they are U.S. citizens and residents.
House Republican Jim Olsen of Roland tackled the topic of ex-pats in House Bill 2938. If passed, the law would prevent individuals who move out of the state or the country indefinitely from voting in state or local elections as an Oklahoma voter, only allowing them to cast their ballot in national races. Individuals who vote in another state or country would also be barred from voting in Oklahoma’s state or local elections.
Senate Bill 1451 adds additional categories to the data collected during voter registration. Those would include whether an individual has ever been rejected from voting in another state, the address where the individual is registered to vote and a statement acknowledging that registering to vote in Oklahoma will void any registration someone has in another state.
Senate Bill 1583 would create the Oklahoma Voting Rights Act. The law would prevent discrimination against voters of protected classes, such as race or tribal affiliation, and lays out ways to identify voter discrimination.
South Carolina: Senate Bill 128 would require anyone registering to vote in South Carolina to provide satisfactory evidence of U.S. citizenship. Under the bill, a person could not be added to the voter rolls unless they submit approved documentation to their county voter registration board. The legislation outlines several forms of acceptable proof, including a valid driver’s license, a current U.S. passport, or a legible birth certificate. It also directs the state Attorney General to review existing voter registration rolls once the law takes effect to ensure compliance.
Utah: A new bill proposed would require people who want to vote in state elections to provide proof of U.S. citizenship. The proposal, H.B. 209, would create a “bifurcated” election system in Utah, where “before voting or when registering to vote,” a voter would be asked whether they want to vote in federal elections, like for the U.S. House of Representatives or the U.S. Senate. That documentation would include a driver’s license that verifies U.S. citizenship, a state ID card, a birth certificate, a passport number, an alien registration number, naturalization documents, an Indian Affairs card, a tribal treaty number, a tribal enrollment number, or any other document that establishes U.S. citizenship. The proposal creates a change that doesn’t appear to violate long-standing federal election law, which does not require documented proof of citizenship to cast a ballot, differentiating federal elections from Utah state elections, such as for Governor or any local races. It’s already illegal to vote in U.S. elections if you’re not a citizen, and federal law requires a declaration of citizenship under the penalty of perjury. The bill is being run by Rep. Cory Maloy (R-Lehi) and was approved by a committee this week.
Vermont: Vermont lawmakers are seeking to enshrine the federal Voting Rights Act into state law while the Trump administration seeks to curb mail-in voting and require proof of citizenship to vote. In the first year of the Trump administration, there has been a big push to undo some election changes, like mail-in voting, which is universal in Vermont. Legislators are now seeking to codify other voting rights into state law. Vermont’s Voting Rights Act would enshrine the national Voting Rights Act of 1965 to expand voting access and criminalize voter intimidation, false information, and interference. “We are defending your right to vote and your right to vote and your right to tell your government what to do,” said Vermont’s Secretary of State, Sarah Copeland Hanzas. Every Democrat in the Vermont Senate has signed onto the bill. The full version is expected to be introduced this week.
Virginia: The Senate Privileges and Elections Committee advanced several Democratic-backed election measures while rejecting multiple Republican efforts to limit early voting. On an 8-7 vote, the committee passed Senate Bill 57 by Sen. Schuyler VanValkenburg, D-Henrico, which would require Virginia to maintain membership in the Electronic Registration Information Center (ERIC), a multistate data-sharing consortium used to help states maintain accurate voter rolls. But the panel rejected another VanValkenburg proposal, SB 76, on a 9-6 vote. The bill would have consolidated presidential-year primaries by moving all primaries for offices appearing on the November ballot to the presidential primary date, while also adjusting petition signature rules and campaign finance deadlines. The committee advanced SB 58 by Sen. Barbara Favola, D-Arlington, on a 9-5 vote. The bill would extend the deadline for receipt of absentee ballots, ballot cure materials and certain provisional ballot documentation from noon to 5 p.m. on the third day after an election.
On mostly party-line votes, the committee rejected several Republican proposals aimed at scaling back early voting. SB 46 by Sen. Christie New Craig, R-Chesapeake, would have reduced in-person absentee voting from 45 days before an election to 15 days. Craig said registrars are struggling with the volume and cost of elections. The committee killed the bill 8-7. A similar proposal, SB 298 by Sen. Mark Peake, R-Lynchburg, would have limited early in-person voting to the 10 days immediately preceding an election, with expanded daily hours. Peake said local governments are being stretched thin. The committee rejected the bill, also by an 8-7 vote. The panel likewise voted down SB 533 by Sen. David Suetterlein, R-Roanoke County, which would have standardized early voting hours statewide.
Wisconsin: State Democratic lawmakers introduced a package of 25 bills that they say are aimed at protecting voters and elections in Wisconsin. One of the bills would require the Wisconsin Elections Commission to automatically register everyone to vote if they’re eligible. Another bill in the package would shorten the residency requirement for a person to be able to vote at a certain address. Right now, they are required to live there for at least 28 days before the election. The proposed legislation would shorten the requirement to 10 days, which is what state law required before 2011. Democrats are also backing a bill that would ban people from carrying a firearm within 100 feet of a polling place or a location where election officials are conducting a canvass or recount.
Legal Updates This Week
Alaska: The Alaska Court of Appeals will decide whether to dismiss felony voter misconduct charges against an Alaska resident born in American Samoa, one of numerous cases that has put a spotlight on the complex citizenship status of people born in the U.S. territory. The Alaska Court of Appeals heard arguments last week in the case against Tupe Smith, who was arrested after winning election to a regional school board in 2023. Smith has said she relied on erroneous information from local election officials in the community of Whittier when she identified herself as a U.S. citizen on voter registration forms. Smith’s attorneys have asked the appeals court to reverse a lower court’s decision that let stand the indictment brought against her. Smith’s supporters say she made an innocent mistake that does not merit charges, but the state has argued that Smith falsely and deliberately claimed citizenship. Smith “and others like her who get caught up in Alaska’s confusing election administration system and do not have any intent to mislead or deceive should not face felony voter misconduct charges,” one of her attorneys, Whitney Brown, told the court. The court did not give a timeline for when it would issue a ruling.
Arizona: Common Cause and the Arizona Alliance for Retired Americans have filed to intervene in the lawsuit the U.S. Department of Justice has filed against the State of Arizona over voter rolls. The groups argue they have their own unique interests in joining the suit. The groups argue voter information is protected by state privacy laws. They also say the attempt to compile a national voter database stems from unfounded claims that millions of non-citizens are voting, which could lead to people’s registration to be illegally cancelled. The groups argue that the National Voter Registration Act from the ’90s leaves voter administration to the states. Arizona is just one of two-dozen states sued by the DOJ seeking voter rolls.
California: U.S. District Judge David O. Carter granted a motion to dismiss a Department of Justice lawsuit filed last September demanding California turn over its full voter registration list to the federal government. In his ruling, Carter said he was unpersuaded by the DOJ’s attempts to use provisions of the Help America Vote Act and the Civil Rights Act to force the state to share entire unredacted voter rolls containing the sensitive personal information of millions of residents. Carter said the DOJ’s attempt to use Title III of the Civil Rights Act, which was passed in the Jim Crow era in response to efforts to suppress Black Americans from voting, “lacked depth” and was “contrived.” DOJ argued that its request for the data, including addresses, full names, partial Social Security numbers and driver’s license numbers, was to enforce compliance with the National Voter Registration Act. But Carter wrote in his order that even if Title III had been intended as a mechanism for such enforcement, which it was not, the DOJ did not explain why it would need full, unredacted voter rolls to enforce compliance with the NVRA. Carter also pointed out the “longstanding precedent” for the entitlement of states to redact sensitive data from their voter rolls, including Project Vote/Voting for Am., Inc. v. Long and True the Vote v. Hosemann.
This week, the state Republican Party filed an emergency application asking the U.S. Supreme Court to issue an injunction to stop the congressional districts California voters approved last year from going into effect. Arguing that the districts created by Proposition 50 violate federal law because the race of voters was considered when they were configured, the filing urges the court to act by Feb. 9 because of ensuing deadlines for candidates to file to run for office. “Our emergency application asks the Supreme Court to put the brakes on Prop. 50 now, before the Democrats try to run out the clock and force candidates and voters to live with unconstitutional congressional districts,” state GOP Chairwoman Corrin Rankin said in a statement. “Californians deserve fair districts and clean elections, not a backroom redraw that picks winners and losers based on race.”
Michigan: The Michigan Supreme Court has declined – for now – to hear arguments in litigation over absentee ballots cast during the Nov. 4, 2025, mayor’s race in Hamtramck. The court order, issued January 15, instead insists on an expedited decision from the Michigan Court of Appeals. The dispute involves the status of 37 absentee ballots that were found at the city clerk’s office one day after the November election, and remain uncounted. The votes were declared in the meantime as 2,071 votes for Adam Alharbi and 2,060 for Muhith Mahmood. Alharbi’s term as mayor began Jan. 1, and an inauguration event took place Jan. 4. But litigation was still in progress, and a motion for an emergency appeal was filed just before the inauguration. “The Court is not persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court before consideration by the Court of Appeals. The Court of Appeals shall expedite its consideration of the case,” the state Supreme Court majority ruling said. Justice Elizabeth M. Welch was the one dissenter, saying the Supreme Court does have the discretion to step into a pending case and, given the timing of the circumstances, “I believe that doing so is warranted in this case.” “It is quite possible that Adam Alharbi earned the most votes in the mayoral election. But it is also possible that Muhith Mahmood is the rightful winner,” Welch wrote. “Mayors play an important role in shaping their community’s public policy.”
South Dakota: The settlement between South Dakota tribes and the state over violations of the National Voter Registration Act has concluded. In 2022, a lawsuit was brought forward by the Rosebud Sioux Tribe, Oglala Sioux Tribe, Lakota People’s Law Project and individual Native voters for failing to provide voter registration opportunities in Native communities. A three-year settlement was approved by the federal district court on Sept. 6, 2022, according to a news release from the Native American Rights Fund. Under the settlement agreement, South Dakota implemented reforms to comply with NVRA rules, mandatory agency training and standardizing procedures for voter registration and address changes. “This case forced meaningful changes that should never have required litigation in the first place,” Rosebud Sioux Tribe President Kathleen Wooden Knife said in the news release. “Native voters deserve equal access to registration every time they interact with state agencies, and we expect those obligations to continue even as this agreement ends.”
Wyoming: Natrona County Circuit Judge Kevin Taheri rejected an attempt by Weston County clerk to have the criminal case against her dismissed. Defense attorney Ryan Semerad had argued the Wyoming Legislature’s Management Audit Committee acted outside the scope of state law when one of its subcommittees subpoenaed Becky Hadlock. The subcommittee was investigating her actions related to a miscount during the November 2024 general election. Semerad maintains the subpoena was invalid, and he asked Taheri to toss a misdemeanor charge against Hadlock now rather than let the matter proceed to a jury trial. Taheri was unconvinced. After a nearly hour-long hearing this week, the judge concluded the committee possessed the authority to subpoena witnesses as part of its inquiry into Hadlock and the election errors. “I don’t think it is the place of the court to second-guess the Legislature’s motives,” Taheri said. Hadlock faces a single count of failing to appear for a subpoena, which carries a maximum penalty of six months in jail and a $100 fine. Her trial is set for next week, but Semerad told WyoFile after the hearing that he planned to seek a pause in the case while he asks the district court to consider an appeal of Taheri’s decision.
NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote! Michael H. Drucker
No comments:
Post a Comment