SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
voting
'Terrifying Moment in Our Democracy': Virginia Supreme Court Rejects Voter-Approved Redistricting
"Unlike GOP-led states that redrew their congressional maps in backroom deals, Virginia let the people decide," said Sen. Tim Kaine. "But the Virginia Supreme Court has blocked the people's choice."
May 08, 2026
Virginia, one of two states that combated President Donald Trump's gerrymandering campaign by enacting voter-approved congressional districts favoring Democrats, had its new map struck down by the state Supreme Court on Friday.
"On March 6, 2026, the General Assembly of Virginia submitted to Virginia voters a proposed constitutional amendment that authorizes partisan gerrymandering of congressional districts in the commonwealth," notes the court opinion. Voters narrowly approved the proposal, 51.7% to 48.3% last month.
However, the state's high court found that "the legislative process employed to advance this proposal violated Article XII, Section 1 of the Constitution of Virginia. This constitutional violation incurably taints the resulting referendum vote and nullifies its legal efficacy."
Responding in a Friday statement, Speaker of the Virginia House of Delegates Don Scott (D-88) said that "we respect the decision of the Supreme Court," while also celebrating that so many Virginians turned to the ballot box to "fight back against the Trump power grab" and pledging to keep up the battle "for a democracy where voters—not politicians—have the final say."
Some leading Democrats were more critical of the Republican-majority state court, which Virginia Attorney General Jay Jones said "has chosen to put politics over the rule of law" with a decision that "silences the voices of the millions of Virginians who cast their ballots in every corner of the commonwealth, and... fuels the growing fears across our nation about the state of our democracy."
"Before the court, my office clearly laid out both in filings and oral arguments that this constitutional amendment process and voter ratification occurred in a timely, constitutionally compliant, and legally sound manner," he continued. The court "contorted the plain language of the constitution and code of Virginia to give it a meaning that was never intended, which allowed them to reach the wrong legal conclusion that fit their political agenda. The consequences of their error are grave."
"This court's ruling follows a dangerous trend of tilting power away from the people," Jones added. "My team is carefully reviewing this unprecedented order, and we are evaluating every legal pathway forward to defend the will of the people and protect the integrity of Virginia's elections."
Denouncing the decision as "outrageous and unconscionable," Congressman Eugene Vindman (D-Va.) said that "at the heart of our democracy is the principle that the results of elections ought to be respected, and the Virginia Supreme Court today dealt our democracy a terrible blow."
MoveOn Political Action's chief communications officer, Joel Payne, also called out the court for "silencing and invalidating the votes of 3 million Virginians," the majority of whom "voted to level the playing field against Republican efforts to avoid accountability at the ballot box."
"Once again, the courts have blunted the will of the people, and are giving a green light to President Trump and Republicans’ unprecedented power grab in the midterms," said Payne, whose group had endorsed Virginia's ballot measure.
US Tim Kaine (D-Va.) isn't up for reelection this cycle, but he still stressed the importance of convincing voters to support Democrats, no matter what their congressional maps look like, in the November midterms. As he put it: "Unlike GOP-led states that redrew their congressional maps in backroom deals, Virginia let the people decide. But the Virginia Supreme Court has blocked the people's choice. So we have to campaign and win on their maps. We can do it!"
California is the other state where voters approved a new map for the US House of Representatives in response to Trump pushing Republican leaders in Texas, Missouri, and Florida to redraw districts to help the GOP in the next election. As in Virginia, California's redistricting is being challenged in court. There have also been recent changes to political lines in Ohio and Utah that could help influence control of Congress.
The 4-3 ruling in Virginia—which election expert Dave Wasserman noted is an "enormous setback for Dems" who had hoped to pick up four seats—came just hours after Tennessee Republicans passed a new map targeting the state's only majority-Black district, despite objections in Memphis and across the state. Their move followed the US Supreme Court ruling that gutted the remnants of the Voting Rights Act (VRA) last week, which also led to an ongoing fight over a primary in Louisiana.
Human rights attorney and former Illinois congressional candidate Qasim Rashid said Friday: "So to be sure, US Supreme Court says red states can ignore the will of the people and gerrymander their districts 9-0 in favor of MAGA Republicans. But VA Supreme Court says blue states cannot put the vote to the will of the people and follow through on the people's vote to redistrict."
"Once again, gerrymandering that centers white people is A-OK, but gerrymandering that centers a broad base of voters is not," he added. "Absurd."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Democrats File Sweeping Lawsuit to Stop 'Unlawful' Trump Attack on Mail-In Voting
"Our Constitution’s framers anticipated this kind of desire for absolute power."
Apr 02, 2026
President Donald Trump's executive order placing restrictions on mail-in voting in the US is now facing a sweeping lawsuit from the Democratic Party.
In a complaint filed Wednesday with the US District Court for the District of Columbia, the Democrats argued that Trump "has tried again and again to rewrite election rules for his own perceived partisan advantage," this time going after mail voting, which he has baselessly claimed cost him the 2020 presidential election.
The Democrats contended, however, that Trump has no constitutional authority to single-handedly rewrite election laws, noting that the US Constitution explicitly gave states the power to administer their own elections.
"Our Constitution’s framers anticipated this kind of desire for absolute power," the complaint states. "They recognized the menace it would pose to ordered liberty and the ways in which it would corrode self-government like an acid... They left most election authority with the states, permitted state regulations to be displaced only upon the agreement of both chambers of Congress, and established an independent judiciary to repel threats to individual rights."
The complaint then dives into the contents of Trump's order, which it says "seeks to impose radical changes to the manner and conditions under which citizens may cast absentee or mail-in ballots," and would "imminently threaten to disenfranchise lawful voters."
Specifically, the lawsuit argues that Trump is asking the US Postal Service to "take actions unrelated to the agency's statutory mandate that run roughshod over established protections for voters who rely on the mail to exercise their fundamental right" to vote in US elections.
Given that the order doesn't "stem either from an act of Congress or from the Constitution itself," the complaint continues, "it is an unlawful exercise of authority that must be declared invalid."
A joint statement released by Democratic leaders, including Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), accused Trump of trying to restrict mail-in voting as a last-ditch effort to stop voters from ousting his Republican congressional allies.
"The American people are fed up with Republicans’ price-spiking, healthcare-gutting agenda and are ready to vote them out," they said. "That’s why Donald Trump is desperately trying to rig our elections by making it harder to vote for seniors, Americans with disabilities, members of the military, rural communities, and other working families who rely on vote-by-mail. This move is blatantly unconstitutional, and we will fight against it."
Shortly after the Democrats filed their lawsuit, the Campaign Legal Center and Democracy Defenders Fund filed a complaint against the Trump executive order on behalf of the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), Secure Families Initiative, and Arizona Students’ Association.
Danielle Lang, vice president of voting rights and the rule of law at the Campaign Legal Center, said that the suit was necessary to block Trump's "unprecedented" effort to "unconstitutionally assert total authority over our elections."
"Attempts to command the US Department of Homeland Security to work with independent agencies on efforts to disenfranchise eligible voters... are simply unconstitutional and violate long-standing protections for Americans," Lang added.
Elections expert Rick Hasen, a law professor at the University of California, argued in a Wednesday op-ed for Slate that lawsuits against Trump's executive order would probably prove successful and that it "likely will be found unconstitutional by courts."
However, Hasen also warned that the order could still create enough chaos and uncertainty to throw the outcome of close elections into doubt.
"Trump is engaging in election denialism theater," Hasen explained. "It makes voters of all sides mistrust the election process and the virtues of democracy. It convinces his supporters that Democrats have to cheat to win, something that will come in handy should Democrats take back control of the House in November with the intent of beginning investigations and potentially impeachment."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Voting Rights Advocates Sue Over Florida GOP 'Show Your Papers' Law
"The Legislature's failure to look out for constituents instead of legislators' own political interests will harm married women, naturalized citizens, young people, and many other eligible voters."
Apr 01, 2026
As President Donald Trump bullies Congress to pass a voter suppression bill while also trying to take matters into his own hands with an executive order, voting rights advocates on Wednesday sued to block similar legislation passed by Florida Republicans.
Common Cause, Florida Immigrant Coalition, Florida Rising, Hispanic Federation, League of Women Voters of Florida, and UnidosUS filed the lawsuit over House Bill 991 on the same day that the state's Republican governor, Ron DeSantis, signed it. The law requires documentary "evidence of citizenship," such as a birth certificate or passport, to register to vote or remain on the rolls.
"New barriers to voting too often fall hardest on the communities that have long fought to be heard in our democracy," noted Caren Short, director of legal and research at the League of Women Voters of the United States. "Sadly, but unsurprisingly, Florida's new documentary proof of citizenship law requirement is based on xenophobic lies and disinformation."
It's already illegal for noncitizens to vote, and research has shown voter fraud is incredibly rare. Short said that "the Legislature's failure to look out for constituents instead of legislators' own political interests will harm married women, naturalized citizens, young people, and many other eligible voters who do not have ready access to documents like passports or birth certificates."
Common Cause Florida executive director Amy Keith warned that "if this law stands, thousands of US citizens will be removed from Florida's voter rolls, blocking them from voting in the next presidential election if they can't afford specific documents."
"Life is getting increasingly harder and more expensive in Florida," Keith continued, "but with this bill, legislators are purging the very voters who are suffering most from Florida's affordability crisis. I don't think that's a coincidence."
UnidosUS Florida state director Jared Nordlund similarly said that the state's Republican policymakers "know their agenda is unpopular, and when they cannot win by persuading voters, they try to win by making it harder for people to vote."
"HB 991 is another solution in search of a problem, and Florida is once again the testing ground for a voter suppression playbook that could spread nationwide," Nordlund declared. "These laws target the voices they fear most, especially women, communities of color, and working-class voters."
The groups behind the suit—filed in the US District Court for the Southern District of Florida—are represented by the state and national ACLU as well as the Advancement Project and LatinoJustice PRLDEF.
BREAKING: Gov. Ron DeSantis just signed Florida’s new anti-voter law, HB 991. This “show your papers” law adds unnecessary barriers to voting, so @aclu.org and @aclufl.bsky.social are suing. In America, voters choose our leaders — politicians don’t get to choose who votes.We’ll see you in court.
— Abdelilah Skhir (@abskhir.bsky.social) April 1, 2026 at 12:18 PM
"Florida's new 'show your papers' law is a blatant attempt to add unnecessary barriers to the ballot box," said Jonathan Topaz, staff attorney with the ACLU's Voting Rights Project. "We bring this lawsuit to ensure that Florida cannot block its eligible voters from exercising their fundamental right to vote because of missing or mismatched paperwork."
Separately on Wednesday, Elias Law Group launched another legal challenge on behalf of the Florida NAACP and the Florida Alliance for Retired Americans, also challenging what law firm partner Abha Khanna called "one of the worst voter suppression laws in modern American history." This case was filed in the Northern District of Florida.
DeSantis' signing of HB 991 and the subsequent suits came a day after Trump signed a voter suppression executive order that critics called a "blatant, unconstitutional abuse of power." The measure requires the secretary of homeland security to establish a "citizenship list" of verified eligible voters in each state and directs the postmaster general to make new rules for voting by mail.
Sophia Lin Lakin, director of the ACLU's Voting Rights Project, said in a Tuesday statement that "once again, President Trump is attempting to seize power he does not have. The president's order is not about protecting elections—it's about trying to control them and using that control to make it harder to vote for his perceived enemies. The Constitution is very clear: Only Congress and the states can make laws regarding our elections."
"The ability to vote by mail is crucial to our democracy," she explained. "It ensures that voters with disabilities, those without transportation access, working families, those who are deployed or otherwise abroad, and many others who rely on its flexibility can exercise their right to vote. President Trump's attempts to undermine a safe, proven, and reliable method of voting is just another part of his strategy to sow distrust in our elections. As always, we are prepared to protect our democracy and our right to vote in court against these continued unconstitutional attacks."
Trump signed the order while pressuring the US Senate to pass anti-voter legislation that's already been approved by Republicans in the House of Representatives. Advancement Project power and democracy program director Hani Mirza said that the president's directive "cannot be separated from the broader legislative push for the SAVE America Act, which would impose burdensome proof-of-citizenship and photo ID requirements that would create new barriers to the ballot for millions of Americans."
"The authoritarian plan to shrink the number of people who can participate in the 2026 midterms is clear," Mirza added, just over seven months before Election Day. "In our ongoing pursuit of a truly multiracial democracy, we refuse to remain silent and will continue to defend the right to vote until every community is heard and every eligible voter is able to cast a ballot that counts."
This article has been updated to include a second lawsuit against the Florida law.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular