Voting Rights, Registration and Requirements

Subterms

    Latest story

    113 Shares54 Views

    Wisconsin Voters Approve Amendment Requiring Photo ID to Vote

    by

    The state has required voters to use photograph identification for nearly a decade, but an amendment to the Wisconsin Constitution was seen as making it more difficult to roll back that rule.Wisconsin voters on Tuesday approved an amendment to the State Constitution to strengthen a current law requiring photo identification at the polls, The Associated Press said, a victory for Republicans who sponsored the effort.For close to a decade, state law has required the use of photo ID when voting at the polls in Wisconsin.But a constitutional amendment was seen as making it far more difficult to roll back the voter ID law, even under a state Supreme Court with a liberal majority or if the State Legislature fell under Democratic control. The measure was brought by Republicans, who control a majority of seats in the State Legislature and had pressed for the amendment for years.Conservatives have steadily and successfully pushed for stricter voter ID laws across the country, suggesting that they are needed to combat widespread voter fraud. Election experts say that voter fraud in American elections is exceedingly rare.Democratic leaders opposed the effort for the amendment in Wisconsin, arguing that it would disenfranchise voters including students, older people and particularly Black voters, who studies have shown are less likely to carry photo identification than white voters. While Black voters make up only about 5 percent of Wisconsin’s electorate, they overwhelmingly favor Democratic candidates.Democrats also questioned why the amendment should be a priority at all, saying that Republicans were neglecting more pressing matters facing the state such as affordable child care, public education and gun control.Last week, President Trump stepped into the fray on voter ID requirements, issuing an executive order seeking to require documentary proof of citizenship to vote. Democrats responded with a lawsuit on Monday, arguing that the president’s order was unconstitutional and that he has no explicit authority to regulate elections.Thirty-six states ask for or require voters to show some form of identification at the polls, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures, a nonpartisan group.Polls show that voter ID laws enjoy broad bipartisan support, with a Pew Research survey conducted in January finding that 81 percent of voters agree with a requirement that all voters should show government-issued identification to cast ballots.Wisconsin voters also strongly support voter ID laws, according to polls in recent years. A 2021 survey by the Marquette University Law School showed that 92 percent of Republicans and 55 percent of Democrats favored requiring photo ID to vote. More

    More stories

    • 100 Shares88 Views

      in Elections

      Democrats Sue Trump Over Executive Order on Elections

      by

      Nearly every arm of the Democratic Party united in filing a lawsuit against the Trump administration on Monday night, arguing that a recent executive order signed by the president seeking to require documentary proof of citizenship and other voting reforms is unconstitutional.The 70-page lawsuit, filed in Federal District Court in Washington, D.C., accuses the president of vastly overstepping his authority to “upturn the electoral playing field in his favor and against his political rivals.” It lists President Trump and multiple members of his administration as defendants.“Although the order extensively reflects the president’s personal grievances, conspiratorial beliefs and election denialism, nowhere does it (nor could it) identify any legal authority he possesses to impose such sweeping changes upon how Americans vote,” the lawsuit says. “The reason why is clear: The president possesses no such authority.”The lawsuit repeatedly argues that the Constitution gives the president no explicit authority to regulate elections, noting that the Elections Clause of the Constitution “is at the core of this action.” That clause says that states set the “times, places and manner” of elections, leaving them to decide the rules, oversee voting and try to prevent fraud. Congress may also pass federal voting laws.As Democrats debate how best to challenge the Trump administration’s rapid expansion of executive power, the lawsuit represents one of the first moments where seemingly every arm of the party is pushing back with one voice.Such unity is further evidence that Democrats still view the issue of democracy as core to their political brand, as well as a key issue that can help them claw back support with voters as they aim to build a new coalition ahead of the 2026 midterm elections. In February, Democrats sued the Trump administration over attempts to control the Federal Election Commission. Weeks earlier, the D.N.C. joined a lawsuit over new voting laws in Georgia.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 125 Shares139 Views

      in Elections

      N.C. Elections Board Rejects G.O.P. Effort to Toss 60,000 Ballots

      by

      The ruling comes in a dispute over a State Supreme Court race that the Democratic incumbent won by 734 votes.The North Carolina State Board of Elections rejected on Wednesday a Republican bid to throw out more than 60,000 votes in a closely contested election for a State Supreme Court seat that an incumbent Democrat won by 734 votes.Two recounts showed that Associate Justice Allison Riggs, the incumbent, had eked out a slim victory out of some 5.5 million ballots that were cast. The losing judge, Jefferson Griffin, a Republican, argued that the state’s failure to enforce technical aspects of registration and election laws should disqualify scores of thousands of voters, most or all of whom cast otherwise legal ballots.The Democrat-controlled elections board disagreed, in a series of votes that went largely along party lines. Republicans on the board called for further hearings to gather more evidence on the issues.“The idea that someone could have been registered to vote, came to vote and then has their vote discarded is anathema to the democratic system,” the board’s Democratic chairman, Allan Hirsch, said at the meeting.The chairman of the state Republican Party denounced the decision, saying that “the board’s continued efforts to engineer political outcomes for Democrats is shameful.”Judge Griffin, who currently sits on the State Court of Appeals, could appeal the ruling to a State Superior Court, kicking off a legal process that could end at the same State Supreme Court where Justice Riggs sits. Republicans hold a 5-to-2 majority on the court, which has been bitterly divided along partisan lines in recent years.The ruling on Wednesday also rejected attempts by three Republican state legislators to overturn their narrow losses on the same grounds.In a protest against the election results filed last month, Judge Griffin argued that upward of 60,000 voters should be disqualified because the state failed to enact one part of a 2004 law requiring new voters to provide a driver’s license or Social Security number when applying to vote. Voters who failed to list numbers should be ineligible, he said, even if they were unaware of the requirement.His complaint also sought to disqualify overseas voters who failed to submit a photo ID with their ballots in accordance with a new voter ID law. Those overseas voters also were not told of the requirement.Lawyers for Justice Riggs, as well as the state Democratic Party, argued that federal law bars throwing out votes for lack of a driver’s license or Social Security numbers. They also said that state law setting out the rules for overseas votes does not require a photo ID. More

    • 100 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Activists File ‘Bad-Faith’ Ballot Challenges, Pennsylvania Officials Say

      by

      Right-wing activists and G.O.P. state lawmakers have questioned the eligibility of some 4,000 people who requested ballots.One by one, they testified under oath: a military spouse who moves every three years. A man just back from six months of traveling around the country. A graduate student temporarily away for school.All were eligible voters who had cast a mail ballot in Chester County, Pa., a suburb of Philadelphia, before Election Day. And they, along with more than 200 others, had their votes challenged by a single activist, who questioned whether they met residency requirements.Some 4,000 such ballot challenges were delivered to 14 election offices across the critical battleground state by Friday, the deadline. The challenges represent an escalation of a tactic that has been used increasingly since the 2020 election. While thousands of voter registrations have been contested since then, the Pennsylvania cases could toss out votes already cast — a move election officials say they have rarely seen on this large a scale.Many of the challenges were submitted by activists who have mobilized around Donald J. Trump’s falsehoods about rigged elections. Election officials warn that the challenges not only threaten to disenfranchise voters, but they also propel unnecessary skepticism about the integrity of the election.“These challenges are based on theories that courts have repeatedly rejected,” the Pennsylvania Department of State said in a statement, adding that they were made in “bad faith,” appeared coordinated and were meant to “undermine the confidence in the Nov. 5 election.”A leading activist in Pennsylvania disputed state officials’ characterization of the effort. Heather Honey, the activist, said the challenges “could not be in better faith.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 138 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Judge Allows Iowa to Challenge Voters It Suspects of Being Noncitizens

      by

      A federal judge ruled on Sunday that Iowa may continue challenging hundreds of potential ballots cast in the election on the basis that the voters might be noncitizens, a move that critics say could disenfranchise legitimate voters.Iowa’s secretary of state, Paul Pate, a Republican, issued a letter to county commissioners last month challenging the status of 2,176 people on voter rolls, saying that they had previously identified themselves to a state agency as noncitizens. The plaintiffs in the case were four recently naturalized U.S. citizens whose voting status was challenged, despite being eligible to vote. They had asked the court for a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction to rescind the letter and restore the status of any voters removed from the rolls.But Judge Stephen H. Locher of the Southern District of Iowa, who was appointed by President Biden, said that a small minority of the 2,176 registered voters — about 12 percent, or about 250 people — “are indeed registered voters who are not United States citizens,” and that granting an injunction “effectively forces local election officials to allow ineligible voters to vote.”It is a felony for a noncitizen to vote in a federal election, potentially resulting in jail time, a fine and deportation.Judge Locher also pointed to a U.S. Supreme Court ruling last week that allowed Virginia to purge about 1,600 people from its voter rolls in supporting his decision to allow the challenge to go forward.But he also expressed concern at some of the directives in Mr. Pate’s letter, which he said directed local election officials to challenge the legitimacy of a voter on the list “even when the local officials themselves do not suspect the person is ineligible to vote” and “require voters on the list to file provisional ballots even when they have proven citizenship at the polling place.”In a statement, Mr. Pate said that the ruling was “a win for Iowa’s election integrity,” adding that his role “requires balance — ensuring that on one hand, every eligible voter is able to cast their ballot while ensuring that only eligible voters participate in Iowa elections.” More

    • 113 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      Uncertainty Reigns in Nevada With Rise of Nonpartisan Voters

      by

      With early voting coming to a close, Donald Trump and Kamala Harris must now ensure their respective bases show up on Election Day, while chasing down those whose choice is less clear.As early voting came to a close in Nevada, many of the state’s most veteran pollsters, pundits and political operatives — no strangers to close elections and their accompanying jitters — are finding it uniquely difficult to predict what happens next.Republicans, thrilled with their surprise early voting edge, say they are well on their way to making former President Donald J. Trump the first Republican to win the state since 2004. Democrats agree that Republicans have seized an unusual and anxiety-inducing advantage, but insist that their prized organizing machine will put Vice President Kamala Harris over the top.But what’s making this presidential election different is the sheer number of voters who don’t officially identify with either party. Thanks to the state’s relatively new automatic voter registration law, nonpartisan voters became Nevada’s largest voting bloc in 2022, outpacing both Democratic and Republican registrations.Figuring out who those voters are, and how or if they will cast a ballot, has been a crucial challenge for the campaigns scrambling to find and sway those last few persuadable people. Changes in voting patterns wrought by the pandemic four years ago are also throwing prognosticators for a loop.“The Achilles’ heel of early vote analysis is that it’s really difficult to make cycle-to-cycle comparisons,” said Adam Jentleson, who was a senior aide to Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the longtime Democratic leader, “and that has never been more true than in this cycle.”All of those factors combined mean “you are flying blind,” he added.The race is tied, according to The New York Times’s polling average. Both Mr. Trump and Ms. Harris have visited Nevada multiple times, emphasizing that every ballot will make a difference.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 163 Shares109 Views

      in Elections

      As Trump Sows Doubt on Pennsylvania Voting, Officials Say the System Is Working

      by

      With about a week to go before Election Day, officials from two Pennsylvania counties announced that they had found large batches of suspicious voter registration forms. While at least some of the documents appeared to be fraudulent, there is no indication that any of them are ballots, though officials clarified that they were continuing to investigate.To hear former President Donald J. Trump’s telling, Pennsylvania’s election system was already melting down.“They’ve already started cheating in Lancaster,” he said at a rally on Tuesday night in Allentown, Pa. “Every vote was written by the same person.” He made similar allegations about York County, building on claims that he made on social media earlier in the day about “Really bad ‘stuff,’” in the two counties. “Law Enforcement must do their job, immediately!!!”, he insisted.But contrary to Mr. Trump’s incendiary claim that fake ballots had been cast, there were no reports of actual ballots being among the two batches of documents. And on the ground, away from the high-strung channels of social media, law enforcement was already doing its job.Neither a representative for the Trump campaign nor the state G.O.P. immediately responded to requests for comment.Thousands of voter registration forms, as well as some mail-in ballot applications, were submitted in large batches by out-of-state canvassing groups. Some of the paperwork raised suspicions among county election workers, and officials from both counties said any forms that appeared to be fraudulent would be turned over to local prosecutors.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 88 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      No, noncitizens are not voting in droves.

      by

      The false claimFormer President Donald J. Trump and his allies have falsely claimed that scores of noncitizens — including illegal immigrants — are voting or trying to vote in the United States presidential elections.Why it is falseIt is illegal for noncitizens to vote in federal elections, and studies have concluded that noncitizen voting is essentially nonexistent.A 2017 analysis from the Brennan Center for Justice, a progressive nonprofit, showed that election officials in 42 jurisdictions found only about 30 incidents of potential noncitizen voting in the 2016 election — among more than 23.5 million votes cast, or 0.0001 percent. The Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank, called claims of widespread noncitizen voting “bogus” this year after reviewing state policies and previous audits.Brad Raffensperger, Georgia’s Republican secretary of state, announced in October that the state had found only 20 noncitizens among 8.2 million registered voters. An earlier audit he conducted in 2022, going back 25 years, identified 1,634 people who had tried to register to vote but whose citizenship couldn’t be verified. None were allowed to cast a ballot. Georgia has not identified any example of a noncitizen in Georgia who voted in that time.How the falsehoods are being usedThe claim has played a central role in voter fraud conspiracy theories for years, but Mr. Trump and other Republicans have made it a focal point of their targets against immigration and election integrity.“There’s going to be thousands upon thousands of noncitizens voting,” Mike Johnson, the Republican speaker of the House of Representatives, told Politico — a claim he has repeated in news conferences. “If you have enough noncitizens participating in some of these swing areas, you can change the outcome of the election in the majority.”In July, a group tied to the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, published a video claiming to show noncitizens who were registered to vote. The New York Times found that the video was deceptive. Three of the seven people said they had misspoken, and state investigators found no evidence that any of the people had registered to vote.In October, Mr. Trump claimed that the Department of Justice was trying to put illegal voters “back on the Voter Rolls” in Virginia. The Justice Department sued to stop the Republican governor’s executive order that could remove noncitizen voters. The department cited a federal law that prevents purging voter rolls en masse within 90 days of an election — a process that a lawyer with the Justice Department said puts “qualified voters in jeopardy of being removed from the rolls and creates the risk of confusion for the electorate.” More

    • 125 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Republican Legal Challenges to Voting Rules Hit a Rough Patch

      by

      The legal wars over election rules are raging even as voters around the country cast ballots. And several recent efforts by groups aligned with former President Donald J. Trump to challenge voting rules have been coming up short in federal and state courts.Judges in a number of political battlegrounds and other states have rejected legal challenges this month to voter rolls and procedures by Republicans and their allies.The Nebraska State Supreme Court ruled that election officials cannot bar people with felony convictions from voting after their sentences are served.A Michigan state judge rejected a Republican attempt to prevent certain citizens living abroad, including military members, from being eligible to cast an absentee ballot in that swing state.And a federal judge in Arizona rejected a last-minute push by a conservative group to run citizenship checks on tens of thousands of voters.“They are hitting quite a losing streak,” said David Becker, executive director and founder of the Center for Election Innovation and Research, who advises both Democratic and Republican election officials on rules and procedures and has been tracking election-related litigation.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More