The year’s first downballot primaries start Tuesday. Here’s our guide to all the key races

With both parties' presidential nomination contests all but decided, the nation's downballot primary season starts with a bang Tuesday. Five states—including the two largest—pick their candidates for state and federal offices in elections that will help shape the state of play in key races at all levels.

Below, you'll find our guide to all of the top races to watch on Super Tuesday, arranged chronologically by each state’s poll closing times. When it’s available, we'll tell you about any reliable polling that exists for each race, but if we don't mention any numbers, it means no recent surveys have been made public. You can also check out our most recent episode of "The Downballot" podcast for an even deeper dive on many of these primaries.

Two states on the docket will also be using brand-new congressional maps, though for very different reasons. In Alabama, a federal court drew up new boundaries after ruling that the Voting Rights Act required the creation of a second seat where Black voters could elect their preferred candidate. In North Carolina, though, the Republican-controlled state Supreme Court gave GOP legislators the green light to draw up an aggressive new gerrymander, a task they eagerly took on.

You can find interactive maps from Dave's Redistricting App for Alabama and North Carolina's new boundaries, as well as the maps that first came into use in 2022 for Arkansas, California, and Texas.

You can find Daily Kos Elections' 2020 presidential results for each congressional district here, as well as our geographic descriptions for each seat. You’ll also want to bookmark our primary calendar, which includes the dates for primaries in all 50 states.

We'll be liveblogging all of these races at Daily Kos Elections on Tuesday night, starting when the first polls close at 7:30 PM ET. Join us for our complete coverage!

North Carolina

Polls close at 7:30 PM ET. Candidates must take at least 30% of the vote to avert a May 14 runoff, though the second-place finisher must officially request a runoff for one to occur.

• NC-Gov (R & D) (50-49 Trump): Tar Heel State politicos have long anticipated that the race to succeed termed-out Democratic Gov. Roy Cooper will pit Republican Lt. Gov. Mark Robinson against Democratic Attorney General Josh Stein, and every primary poll shows just such a matchup coming to pass.

While Robinson's intraparty critics have warned that his past screeds—which run the gamut from antisemitic and Islamophobic to misogynistic, homophobic, and transphobic—as well as his ardent opposition to reproductive rights could cost them the general election, primary voters appear unconvinced. The Donald Trump-endorsed lieutenant governor holds a wide lead against both wealthy businessman Bill Graham, who has spent millions on ads attacking Robinson's past statements, and state Treasurer Dale Folwell.

Stein, who has Cooper's support, also enjoys a big advantage over former state Supreme Court Justice Mike Morgan and three other Democrats.

• NC-01 (R) (50-49 Biden): Republican legislators targeted freshman Democratic Rep. Don Davis by transforming his seat in the inland, northeastern corner of the state from a constituency Biden carried 53-46 into one he barely won. Now Army veteran Laurie Buckhout and two-time nominee Sandy Smith are competing for the Republican nomination and take on Davis. Both Smith and especially Buckhout have self-funded a significant portion of their campaigns, and both are campaigning as ardent Trump allies.

The Congressional Leadership Fund, a well-funded super PAC that's close to House GOP leadership, has spent about $200,000 to stop Smith from advancing for the second cycle in a row. Two years ago, CLF failed to stop Smith, who was accused of physical abuse by her daughter and two ex-husbands, from winning the nomination, but it's hoping its latest intervention will be more successful. 

Smith, who has run ads declaring that Trump won the 2020 election and denied her own 52-48 loss to Davis, has also sought to portray Buckhout as an interloper from Virginia and attacked her for getting a 2017 DUI conviction removed from the record. Buckhout, for her part, has largely avoided going after Smith.

• NC-06 (R) (58-41 Trump): Six Republicans are competing to replace Rep. Kathy Manning, who is one of three Democratic House members who is not seeking reelection in a seat that Republicans made all but unwinnable for her party.

Lobbyist Addison McDowell arguably became the front-runner hours before he even announced his candidacy, after Trump endorsed his bid for this district in the central Piedmont region. But the first-time candidate faces several opponents who have been on the ballot in North Carolina before, though they and their allies largely focused on attacking one another rather than McDowell.

One familiar name to national observers is Bo Hines, a former college football player who narrowly lost the 2022 general election to Democrat Wiley Nickel 52-48 in the old 13th. Another is former Rep. Mark Walker, who represented previous versions of the 6th from 2015 to 2021. Also in the running are Christian Castelli, a self-funder who badly lost to Manning last cycle under the previous map; former High Point Mayor Jay Wagner; and Mary Ann Contogiannis, who took third against Castelli in the last primary. 

The Club for Growth, a well-funded anti-tax group that's had an on-again, off-again feud with Trump, is supporting Hines and has spent about $1 million attacking Walker. A super PAC backed by hedge fund billionaire Ken Griffin called Conservatives for American Excellence, though, has spent a comparable amount to leverage the Club's anti-Trump apostasies against Hines.

• NC-08 (R) (58-41 Trump): Far-right Rep. Dan Bishop is leaving Congress to run for attorney general, and six fellow Republicans are on the ballot to replace him in a seat based in the eastern Charlotte suburbs and rural areas further east. The two contenders who have the most money by far are a pair of self-funders, state Rep. John Bradford and former Union County Commissioner Allan Baucom, but it's a third hopeful who has attracted the most outside attention.

That candidate is pastor Mark Harris, whose 2018 House campaign for the old 9th District was responsible for one the most ignominious election-fraud scandals in recent memory. Election authorities threw out the result and ordered a do-over election, which Bishop ultimately won, but Harris still insists he was the rightful winner. Despite his baggage, Harris enjoys the backing of the party's front-runner for governor, Lt. Gov. Mark Robinson.

However, a super PAC called America Leads Action, which is funded by a pair of prominent conservative donors, is working to end Harris' political career once and for all, spending more than $1.8 million on negative ads. There's been no accompanying pro-Harris spending.

• NC-10 (R) (57-41 Trump): Five Republicans are facing off to succeed GOP Rep. Patrick McHenry, who startled the political world when he announced his retirement in December, in a seat that includes Winston-Salem and the western Piedmont region. Only two contenders, though, have brought in a serious amount of money, and they're both self-funders: state Rep. Grey Mills and firearms manufacturer Pat Harrigan, who was the 2022 GOP nominee against Democrat Jeff Jackson in the old 14th District.

Harrigan has Lt. Gov. Mark Robinson's backing, and he's benefited from close to $600,000 in support from two groups, the Koch network's Americans for Prosperity and the Elect Principled Veterans Fund. But another conservative group, GOPAC, has spent over $1.5 million attacking Harrigan on immigration and praising Mills.

• NC-13 (R) (58-41 Trump): Republicans have a 14-way primary to replace another Democrat who is leaving Congress because of GOP gerrymandering, Rep. Wiley Nickel, in a seat based in the Raleigh exurbs and nearby rural areas. There's a good chance this packed contest will go to a runoff, and four contenders appear to have a shot to advance

Three of those candidates have unsuccessfully run for office in recent years. Both businessman DeVan Barbour and attorney Kelly Daughtry competed in the 2022 primary for the previous version of the 13th District (the eventual nominee, Bo Hines, is now seeking the 6th District), while businessman Fred Von Canon was the party's nominee for the state House in 2020 and 2022. The final big name is a first-time candidate, former federal prosecutor Brad Knott. A fifth candidate worth watching though, is Josh McConkey, who won more than $750,000 from the state lottery during the campaign.

Daughtry and Von Canon have each self-funded much of their campaigns, while Knott's family has financed a super PAC called American Foundations Committee to aid him and attack those two rivals. Daughtry's backers at Conservative Voters Alliance have also aired ads to boost her and undermine Knott and Von Canon, while no major independent expenditures have been made either for or against Barbour or McConkey.

Barbour attracted unwanted attention a few weeks before Election Day when a woman accused the married candidate of repeatedly propositioning her for sex in 2021, an allegation he denied. Knott also drew unfavorable headlines during the final week of the race after acknowledging he spent close to a decade voting from his parents' address despite owning a home three miles away.

• NC-AG (D) (50-49 Trump): Democratic Rep. Jeff Jackson launched his bid to replace Attorney General Josh Stein right after Republicans gerrymandered his seat in the House, and he goes into Tuesday with a huge fundraising advantage over his two main foes, Durham County District Attorney Satana Deberry and attorney Tim Dunn. A mid-February Change Research poll for the progressive site Carolina Forward shows Jackson outpacing Deberry 38-14.

However, Republicans appeared to make a late push to boost Deberry, whom they likely believe would be an easier candidate to beat. A new group with GOP ties called And Justice For All PAC has been running ads to promote Deberry, an effort Jackson claimed was "on track" to spend $1 million. The winner will face far-right Rep. Dan Bishop, an election denier who has no opposition in the GOP primary. 

Other North Carolina races to watch:

Alabama

Polls close at 8 PM ET / 7 PM local time. A runoff will take place on April 16 in contests where no one earns a majority of the vote.

• AL-01 (R) (75-24 Trump): Republican Rep. Barry Moore decided to run for this southern Alabama seat after the state's new court-drawn map turned his 2nd District into a Democratic-leaning constituency. Moore, however, faces a difficult primary battle against fellow Rep. Jerry Carl. No other candidates are on the ballot, so this contest should be settled without a runoff.

Carl, who serves the existing 1st District, began the race as the front-runner, in part because he currently represents 59% of the new 1st, while Moore's seat forms the balance. Carl also started off with more money than his colleague and has maintained that advantage, though outside groups have spent comparable amounts for both congressmen.

Both incumbents are ardent conservatives who voted against recognizing Joe Biden's 2020 win, and they're each trying to argue that the other has strayed from MAGA orthodoxy. However, there's a key difference between them: Moore is a member of the nihilistic House Freedom Caucus, while Carl is closer to the party leadership. A poll conducted in the final week of the race by Auburn University at Montgomery found Carl ahead 43-35.

• AL-02 (D) (56-43 Biden): Eleven Democrats are running to replace Republican Rep. Barry Moore in a revamped seat that now takes in Mobile, Montgomery, and the eastern Black Belt, so it's very likely this primary will go to a runoff.

The only candidate who has benefited from significant outside spending is former Justice Department official Shomari Figures, who is the son of a longtime Mobile elected official, state Sen. Vivian Figures. The younger Figures has received more than $1.3 million in support from a super PAC with ties to the cryptocurrency industry, while no major groups have spent anything to attack him.

The field also includes five state legislators, though only two of them―state Reps. Napoleon Bracy and Jeremy Gray―actually represent any part of the new 2nd District. But a third lawmaker, state House Minority Leader Anthony Daniels, has emphasized that he grew up in the Black Belt (even though he now represents Huntsville, at the far end of the state), and he's brought in more money than anyone else in the race.

Also in the running are two legislators from the Birmingham area, state Sen. Merika Coleman and state Rep. Juandalynn Givan.

Texas

The first polls close at 8 PM ET / 7 PM local time in the portion of Texas located in the Central time zone, which includes about 97% of the state's population. Polls close in the rest of the state (a much smaller region in the El Paso area that's in the Mountain time zone) one hour later. A runoff will take place on May 28 in contests in which no one takes a majority of the vote.

• TX-Sen (D) (52-46 Trump): Republican Sen. Ted Cruz holds one of just two Senate seats that Democrats have a realistic shot at flipping this cycle, and nine candidates are hoping to take him on. Rep. Colin Allred, who won his own competitive 2018 race for a seat in the Dallas area, has been the party's front-runner from the start, and he's enjoyed a huge fundraising lead over the rest of the field.

Allred's main opponent is state Sen. Roland Gutierrez, who became a prominent gun-safety activist after the 2022 Uvalde school shooting, which took place in his district. Every poll has shown Allred well ahead, but a pair of February polls disagree on whether the congressman is primed to avoid a runoff. The contest also includes state Rep. Carl Sherman and former Nueces County District Attorney Mark Gonzalez.

• TX-12 (R) (58-40 Trump): Longtime Rep. Kay Granger is retiring from her seat in western Fort Worth and its adjacent suburbs, and five fellow Republicans are campaigning to take her place. The front-runner appears to be state Rep. Craig Goldman, who has the support of Gov. Greg Abbott and has decisively outspent the rest of the field. 

Goldman's main rival is businessman John O'Shea, who began running well before Granger announced her departure in November. O'Shea has the backing of Attorney General Ken Paxton, whom Goldman voted to impeach last year, but he's not getting any major super PAC support.

Conservatives for American Excellence, though, has spent around $600,000 on ads boosting Goldman and attacking O'Shea. Also worth watching is businesswoman Shellie Gardner, a self-funder who is also the self-proclaimed "Queen of Christmas Lights."

• TX-18 (D) (74-25 Biden): Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee announced she would seek a 16th term just two days after she was blown out by state Sen. John Whitmire, a fellow Democrat, in December's runoff to serve as mayor of Houston. Now, however, she faces a tough battle to keep her job. Former Houston City Councilwoman Amanda Edwards, who once was a Jackson Lee intern, spent months campaigning for this seat while the incumbent was running for mayor, and she decided to remain in the race even after the congressman sought to run again.

Edwards, who, at 42, is over three decades younger than her opponent, has pitched herself as an agent of change and largely avoided attacking Jackson Lee. The incumbent's critics, though, are hoping that Jackson Lee was weakened by last year's bruising campaign against Whitmire, which included the release of audio where a person who sounded like Jackson Lee berated her employees. (Jackson Lee neither confirmed nor denied the voice was hers but issued a statement saying she had "fallen short of my own standards.")

The only poll we've seen was a University of Houston survey from mid-February that showed Jackson Lee edging out her better-funded rival by a narrow 43-39 margin. Another 3% went to restauranter Rob Slater, who has raised little money but could keep either Jackson Lee or Edwards from taking the majority they'd need to avert a runoff. 

• TX-23 (R) (53-46 Trump): Four hard-liners are trying to deny renomination to GOP Rep. Tony Gonzales, who was censured by the state party last year, in a sprawling West Texas seat. The incumbent infuriated the far right by, among other things, voting to confirm Joe Biden's victory in the hours after the Jan. 6 attacks and later supporting gun-safety legislation after the Uvalde school shooting, which happened in his district. None of these apostasies, though, have prevented Gonzales from far outraising all of his rivals.

The challenger who has attracted the most attention (and money) is gunmaker Brandon Herrera, who has over 3 million subscribers on his YouTube channel, where he's known as "The AK Guy." Another name to watch is former Medina County GOP Chair Julie Clark, who has self-funded around $900,000 but raised little from donors.

• TX-26 (R) (59-40 Trump): Republicans have an 11-way primary underway to succeed retiring GOP Rep. Michael Burgess in the northern Fort Worth suburbs and exurbs, but Donald Trump and his allies know exactly who they want to win.

Far-right media figure Brandon Gill, who is the son-in-law of MAGA toady Dinesh D'Souza, sports endorsements from Trump, Sen. Ted Cruz, and the Club for Growth. Gill, who has self-funded much of his campaign, has outspent his rivals and has benefited from more than $750,000 in outside support from the Club and an outfit funded by D'Souza called Right Texas.

Several major GOP donors, though, are taking action to stop Gill. America Leads Action and Conservatives for American Excellence have spent a combined $2 million to sink him, an effort that includes ads blasting Gill as a "Wall Street banker" whose "bank did business with communist China."

But it's hard to say who might stop Gill because none of the other 10 candidates have attracted anything like this attention. Gill's main rival is arguably Southlake Mayor John Huffman, the sole sitting elected official in the race. But other notables include former Denton County Judge Scott Armey, who lost a previous version of this seat to Burgess in a nasty 2002 runoff; Luisa Del Rosal, who previously served as chief of staff to 23rd District Rep. Tony Gonzales; and former State District Judge Doug Robison.

• TX-32 (D) (66-33 Biden): Rep. Colin Allred's decision to run for the Senate has opened up his diverse constituency in northern Dallas, prompting 10 fellow Democrats to campaign to succeed him. A pair of contenders, though, have stood out as the front-runners since the early days of the race and appear poised to advance to a likely runoff.

Those two candidates are state Rep. Julie Johnson, who was the first Texas legislator with a same-sex spouse, and Brian Williams, a trauma surgeon who attracted national attention in 2016 after he treated Dallas police officers wounded by a sniper. Both have far outraised their eight rivals, while Johnson has further benefited from around $1 million in support from a crypto-aligned super PAC called Protect Progress.

Also in the running are businessman Raja Chaudhry; Alex Cornwallis, who was the party's 2022 nominee for a seat on the state Board of Education; former Dallas City Council member Kevin Felder; and civil rights attorney Justin Moore.

Other Texas races to watch:

Arkansas 

Polls close at 8:30 PM ET / 7:30 local time. A runoff will take place on April 2 in contests where no one earns a majority of the vote.

• AR-03 (R) (60-37 Trump): Republican Rep. Steve Womack, a self-described "institution guy" who voted to recognize Joe Biden's 2020 win, faces a far-right primary challenge from state Sen. Clint Penzo. But while Penzo has pledged to join the Freedom Caucus if elected to this northwest Arkansas seat, like-minded donors and super PACs have done little to help the underfunded legislator get his message out. No other candidates are on the GOP primary ballot.

California

Polls close at 11 PM ET / 8 PM local time. All candidates running for Congress and for state office compete on one ballot rather than in separate party primaries; the two contenders with the most votes, regardless of party, will then advance to the Nov. 5 general election. Candidates cannot win outright in March by taking a majority of the vote, except in some officially nonpartisan elections.

• CA-Sen (63-34 Biden): Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff has massively outspent his 26 rivals in the race for the Senate seat that Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein held for 31 years until her death last fall (appointed Sen. Laphonza Butler is not running), and he appears to be on track to continue to the second round. Schiff and his super-PAC allies, though, are also working to make sure he gets to face a Republican in this dark blue state rather than contend with an unpredictable general election against fellow Democratic Rep. Katie Porter.

Schiff's side has aired ads designed to help the leading Republican, former Major League Baseball player Steve Garvey, consolidate right-leaning votes by ostensibly attacking him as a Trump supporter who is "too conservative." A few recent polls show Schiff getting the matchup he wants, though the available data is limited.

While Porter, who has her own national fundraising base, has deployed more money than most of the field, Schiff's side has still vastly outspent her on TV. Porter is trying to avoid defeat by running digital ads designed to help another Republican, Eric Early, peel off conservative votes from Garvey, though her efforts have been on a much smaller scale than Schiff’s. A third House Democrat, Barbara Lee, is also running, but she's struggled to raise money and has not performed well in polls.

All of these candidates are also competing in a simultaneous special election for the remainder of Feinstein's term. Only seven contenders are on Tuesday's primary ballot, though, so it's possible we'll see a different winner in this contest than in the election for a full six-year term.

• CA-12 (89-9 Biden): BART board member Lateefah Simon has the support of the departing incumbent, Senate candidate Barbara Lee, and other prominent Democrats, and there's little question she'll advance to the general election to represent Oakland and Berkley. There's less clarity as to whom Simon's opponent might be, though the only other Democrat who has raised a notable amount of money is Cal State professor Jennifer Tran. The field also includes five other Democrats and two Republicans.

• CA-16 (75-22 Biden): Democratic Rep. Anna Eshoo is retiring from a seat based in Silicon Valley, and the race to replace her has become the most expensive House contest in the state.

Eshoo is supporting Santa Clara County Supervisor Joe Simitian, who is one of several current or former Democratic elected officials in the running. But two others, former San Jose Mayor Sam Liccardo and Assemblyman Evan Low, are also waging well-funded campaigns. And while Palo Alto City Councilmember Julie Lythcott-Haims has considerably fewer resources, she may stand out as the only woman waging a serious campaign.

But the best-financed Democrat is Marine veteran Peter Dixon, a businessman who co-founded the bipartisan super PAC With Honor. Dixon has taken advantage of his huge donor base and ability to self-fund, and he's received over $1.3 million in outside support from a group connected to With Honor. The field also includes former Saratoga City Councilmember Rishi Kumar, who lost the all-Democratic 2022 general election to Eshoo 58-42, as well as three other Democrats and two Republicans.

• CA-20 (61-36 Trump): Former Rep. Kevin McCarthy resigned from this Central Valley seat in December after losing his speakership, and 11 candidates are on the ballot to replace him for a full two-year term. There's also a special election for the remaining months of McCarthy's term, but the first round of voting for that race won't take place until two weeks later on March 19.

McCarthy and Donald Trump are backing Assemblyman Vince Fong, a former McCarthy district director. Fong, however, decided to run for Congress only after filing for reelection to the legislature, and California Secretary of State Shirley Weber is arguing that he's violating state law by seeking both posts at once. A state judge allowed Fong to proceed in December, but Weber has appealed that decision.

The other two major Republicans are Tulare County Sheriff Mike Boudreaux and casino owner Kyle Kirkland, though they each have considerably less money or institutional support than Fong.

Two Democrats, security guard Andy Morales and teacher Marisa Wood, are also running, and at least McCarthy's network seems to believe the latter's presence could be beneficial to Fong. A group called Central Valley Values, which is partially funded by the former speaker's leadership PAC, has spent over $640,000 on messaging to help Fong. That messaging has also included anti-Boudreaux ads and what appears to be an attempt to make sure Wood is Fong's general election foe.

• CA-22 (55-42 Biden): Republican Rep. David Valadao faces a rematch against the Democrat he beat in a tight 2022 battle, former Democratic Assemblyman Rudy Salas, but the presence of two more candidates is causing problems for both candidates and their national party allies.

Salas' backers fear that state Sen. Melissa Hurtado, a Democrat who represents most of this Central Valley seat but has raised little money, will split the Democratic vote and allow two Republicans to advance to the general election. Republicans, though, are likewise wary of far-right contender Chris Mathys, a wealthy perennial candidate who almost beat Valadao in the 2022 primary. As a result, national Democrats are waging an expensive campaign to boost Salas even as their GOP counterparts have deployed their own seven-figure effort to derail Mathys.

• CA-30 (72-26 Biden): Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff's decision to run for the Senate has set off a packed and unpredictable 15-way race to succeed him in a seat that includes part of Los Angeles as well as the cities of Burbank and Glendale.

The Democratic field features two state lawmakers, state Sen. Anthony Portantino and Assemblywoman Laura Friedman, while Los Angeles Unified School District Board of Education member Nick Melvoin is also waging a well-funded effort. Another notable name belongs to former Los Angeles City Attorney Mike Feuer, who ran an abortive campaign for Los Angeles mayor in 2022 but has the support of that race’s eventual winner, Mayor Karen Bass.

The field also includes Ben Savage, the "Boy Meets World" actor who has been self-financing most of his campaign. West Hollywood Mayor Sepi Shyne and former State Department official Jirair Ratevosian are also campaigning as Democrats, though they haven't brought in anywhere near as much money as their rivals. Ratevosian may also benefit from being a member of the area's large Armenian American community, though local leaders tell Politico they don't have a deep relationship with him. Another five Democrats, as well as two Republicans and an unaffiliated candidate, round out the field.

• CA-31 (64-33 Biden): Rep. Grace Napolitano is retiring from this seat in the eastern San Gabriel Valley, and five fellow Democrats appear to be waging serious bids to replace her.

The most familiar name is former Rep. Gil Cisneros, who was elected to his only term in office in the 2018 blue wave in a competitive district that includes almost none of the voters he now wants to represent. But while Cisneros, who lost reelection in 2020 to Republican Young Kim, may have begun with little name recognition, the onetime $266 million lottery winner's wealth has allowed him to far outspend his rivals. 

Napolitano herself is supporting state Sen. Bob Archuleta, who would be 79 on taking office and would set the record for the oldest freshman representative in American history. That's not the only concern his critics have leveled at him, though: Archuleta, who has long characterized himself as a moderate, is currently being sued by a former staffer for alleged sexual harassment and retaliation, allegations he's denied.

The field also includes two other candidates who are often identified as centrists: state Rep. Susan Rubio, who represents over 70% of this district, and self-funding attorney Greg Hafif, who touts himself as a "moderate Democrat." Rounding out the big names is Mary Ann Lutz, a local community college trustee and former Napolitano staffer. 

Two Republicans, attorney Daniel Martinez and perennial candidate Benito Bernal, are also on the ballot, and their presence could play a role in what happens next. Cisneros has been sending out mailers ostensibly attacking Martinez as "too close to Trump," a tactic Politico says is aimed at making sure Rubio can't advance. Rubio is trying to counter with text messages to elevate Bernal. The rest of the roster consists of one Democrat and a pair of unaffiliated candidates.

• CA-40 (50-48 Biden): Democrats are hoping that they can put up a strong fight against Republican Rep. Young Kim in this eastern Orange County seat, and two hopefuls are vying to take her on.

Retired Orange County Fire Capt. Joe Kerr, a self-described "centrist" who twice unsuccessfully ran for local office, has brought in considerably more money than Allyson Muñiz Damikolas, the president of the Tustin Unified School District Board of Education. Kerr also enjoys the backing of several California House members, including Senate rivals Adam Schiff and Katie Porter. Damikolas, for her part, was in the news in 2022 when conservatives unsuccessfully tried to recall her for allegedly promoting what they called "critical race theory."

• CA-45 (52-46 Biden): Republican Rep. Michelle Steel will likely be a top Democratic target this fall, and four Democrats are campaigning to face her in western Orange County. 

The two contenders who have generated the most attention are attorney Derek Tran and Garden Grove City Councilwoman Kim Nguyen-Penaloza. Tran has raised significantly more money, but Nguyen-Penaloza, who lost a tight 2022 race for the county Board of Supervisors, has the state Democratic Party in her corner. Attorney Cheyenne Hunt, who has a large social media presence, may also have the resources to advance.

• CA-47 (54-43 Biden): Democratic Rep. Katie Porter's Senate bid has opened up a competitive seat based in coastal Orange County and Irvine. Former Orange County GOP Chair Scott Baugh, who lost to Porter 52-48 in 2022, is running again, and he appears on track to easily move forward to the general election. But the battle between the two leading Democrats, state Sen. Dave Min and attorney Joanna Weiss, is more uncertain.

Min, who has the backing of Porter and the state party, remained the front-runner for most of the race even after he was arrested for drunk driving in May. However, the hawkish pro-Israel group AIPAC has deployed a huge $4.5 million to stop Min, with many of its ads focused on his DUI. EMILY's List, likewise, has dropped over $800,000 to help Weiss, which alone is more than twice as much as all the pro-Min spending combined.

The only recent poll we've seen was a mid-February internal for Baugh that showed him leading with 22%, while Min outpaced Weiss 22-16. The survey also found a second Republican, businessman Max Ukropina, at 9%, while none of the other six candidates on the ballot attracted much support.

• CA-49 (55-43 Biden): Democratic Rep. Mike Levin will be hard for Republicans to beat, but two self-funding Republicans are betting he's not invincible. Those contenders are businessman Matt Gunderson, who came close to winning a Democratic-leaning seat in the state Senate in 2022, and media executive Margarita Wilkinson.

Two more Republicans, businesswoman Sheryl Adams and Marine veteran Kate Monroe, are also campaigning for a constituency located in coastal southern Orange and northern San Diego counties.

Other California races to watch:

Campaign Action

Three House members could soon make their exits—and more will join them

Politico relays that Georgia Rep. David Scott's colleagues in the Democratic caucus "widely expect him not to run" again in his dark blue seat; Scott, who has a history of siding with Republicans, has not commented publicly, though. Two House Republicans who identify with the declining institutionalist wing of the GOP, Arkansas' Steve Womack and Idaho's Mike Simpson, tell the Washington Post in a separate report that they're considering retiring from their safely red seats.

Campaign Action

We’ll start with Scott, whose performance as the top Democrat on the Agriculture Committee has been the subject of much intra-party frustration. His lack of a response to Republican efforts to cut food assistance programs—in a new report, Politico says that he hasn't held a single press conference on the topic this year—apparently prompted Democrats to form a special task force, led by Mississippi Rep. Bennie Thompson, to take point on the issue.

The unusual move seems to have been prompted by concerns about Scott's health. Last year, Politico reported that people close to Scott "acknowledged he’s noticeably slowed in the last few years, citing his increasingly halting speech and trouble at times focusing on a topic."

Politico's article this week says that Scott "no longer speaks with reporters in the halls of the Capitol"; in June, when one reporter was actually able to ask the congressman how a hearing had gone, the congressman replied, "I don't know." "There are real questions about whether he’s with it," an unnamed House colleague told Politico of the 78-year-old Georgian.

Scott, who was first elected in 2002 with support from his late brother-in-law, the legendary Atlanta Braves Hall of Famer Hank Aaron, has long been one of the more conservative members of his caucus. The Democrat crossed party lines in 2016 to back Republican Sen. Johnny Isakson’s bid for reelection, declaring, "He's my friend. He's my partner. And I always look out for my partners." Scott, who donated to Utah GOP Rep. Mia Love's campaign that year, has also sided with Republicans to undermine regulations aimed at reining in predatory payday lenders and preventing auto dealers from charging higher interest rates to people of color.

If the congressman does surprise his colleagues and run again, though, his renomination in this safely blue suburban Atlanta seat is hardly assured. Scott unexpectedly earned just 53% of the vote in a crowded 2020 primary against several underfunded foes—just a few points more than the majority he needed to avert a runoff against former state Rep. Keisha Waites. (Waites, who is now a member of the Atlanta City Council, took 25%.) The incumbent did better last cycle when he turned back South Fulton City Councilor Mark Baker 66-13, though that performance wasn't emphatic for a longtime incumbent.

Meanwhile there’s Womack, a self-described "institution guy" who told the Post's Paul Kane that the far-right's antics have made serving in D.C. "so unpleasant" that he's weighing retirement and would decide whether he's had enough around Labor Day. After the article was published, though, the seven-term congressman backtracked somewhat.

"To be clear, I am frustrated with the state of play in Congress," he tweeted. "[H]owever I have every intention of running for reelection and using my work to fix the institution I love." He still left the door open to leaving, though. "I have always used Labor Day as the time frame for these decisions," he continued. "I take nothing for granted and I’m honored every day to serve my constituents in Arkansas’ Third District."

But while Womack, in Kane's words, is tired of seeing "his party’s leadership kowtowing to a small band of hard-right lawmakers," the story notes that his friends fear one of those hardliners would simply replace him in this northeast Arkansas seat. Womack himself has never had trouble winning renomination, though that hardly means he'd be in for another easy campaign if he ran again: Last year, Rep. French Hill, another member of the GOP minority that recognized Biden's victory, only won his primary for the neighboring 2nd District by a relatively soft 59-41 margin against a foe who was happy to spread the Big Lie.

Simpson, finally, made it clear he shares Womack's grievances. "I think there’s a lot of people like that, to tell you the truth," he told Kane." It’s just people considering: Is this really worth it?" And the answer for the Idaho Republican may be no: "Right now, I’m running again," he said before, as Kane puts it, "pausing for effect" and finishing, "Right now." Unlike Womack, though, Simpson did not provide a timeline for when he expects to make up his mind.

The 72-year-old Simpson is only six years older than his likeminded colleague from the South, but unlike Womack, Simpson just had to fend off an organized attempt to beat him in last year's primary. In that matchup, the incumbent fended off attorney Bryan Smith 55-33 after an expensive fight for an eastern Idaho constituency Simpson first won in 1998. The congressman, who had also turned back Smith 62-38 in 2014, didn't come close to losing, but his declining vote share could foreshadow more tough races to come―if he tries to stick around, that is.

No matter what Womack, Simpson, or Scott do in 2024, however, there's almost certainly plenty of other House members from both parties who are thinking about whether they want to remain in office. Currently just two representatives―California Democrat Grace Napolitano and Indiana Republican Victoria Spartz—have announced they're leaving the chamber and not campaigning for another office. And while just two outright retirements might seem like very few so far, that's in keeping with patterns over the last two decades.

According to data compiled by Daily Kos Elections since the 2005-06 election cycle, an average of about three House incumbents have decided to say goodbye to elective politics altogether before Aug. 1 of each odd-numbered year. That means we can expect many more to call it a career ahead of the 2024 elections, though we'll likely be waiting well into the new year for some decisions.

Arkansas board applicants required to say which of Gov. Sanders’ ‘accomplishments’ is their favorite

We all knew Sarah Huckabee Sanders would be an awful Arkansas governor, but few thought she’d sink to Trumpian depths of depravity. Because that’s really hard to do, you know? No matter which wayside you visit on your day trip to perdition, Donald Trump has already been there, clogging the loos with his barmy, technicolor brain bilge.

As Trump continues to play Jenga with American democracy, his second—and arguably lying-est—Mouth of Sauron is taking a page from his seminal prison bathroom memoir Mein Krispy Kreme Cruller. As sharp-eyed Arkansas Times reporter Austin Bailey helpfully pointed out for those of us who aren’t as into Sarah Huckabee Sanders as Sarah Huckabee Sanders is, the governor has been fishing for compliments via the online application for Arkansas board and commission positions.

The Arkansas Times:

The application form you must fill out to be considered for a post on state boards and commissions includes this question: “What is an accomplishment of the Governor’s that you admire the most?”

If you’ve got 500 words ready to go about how much you love Gov. Sarah Sanders, you could be eligible for a post on the state’s dozens of boards.

As Bailey notes, this spicy nugget was unearthed by Nate Bell, a former Republican member of the Arkansas Legislature who describes himself on Twitter as a “politically homeless conservaterian.” (Sure, he may be an Arkansas conservative, but it’s nice to see that some of his ilk are at least a tad uncomfy with their compatriots’ gleeful embrace of fascism and cults of personality.)

Seems like an important qualification for service on an Arkansas board or Commission. #TIC #arpx #arleg #BananaRepublic pic.twitter.com/qx1cBSYqn6

— Nate Bell (@NateBell4AR) April 10, 2023

Bailey also took a screenshot of a portion of the questionnaire that asks applicants which book best defines their lives. That section gives them a mere 250 words to elaborate—half the space they’re allotted for their obsequious paeans to Sanders.

So where did Sanders get the idea that eligibility for government service should be based on how much her proto-minions like her? As she would likely tell Big Daddy Don Trump: “You, all right? I learned it by watching you!”

How could any of us forget the obvious Stalinesque tactic Trump used to delay doing actual work during his first full Cabinet meeting? (Bonus points if you can remember which of these fawning twits Trump would later petulantly fire—or attempt to murder—via Twitter.)

RELATED STORY: 'You're one heck of a leader': Republicans line up to fluff Trump's fragile ego

Of course, since becoming Arkansas governor, Sanders has been buffing her MAGA bona fides. Following President Joe Biden’s January State of the Union address, she gave a Republican response that Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson called the weirdest sort of dystopian speech I think I've heard since 'American carnage'"—a reference to Trump’s bizarre inauguration address, which was reportedly penned by either dyspeptic senior Trump adviser Stephen Miller or ChatGoebbelsPT. 

RELATED STORY: No one has ever worked harder to waste their 15 minutes of fame than Sarah Huckabee Sanders

Meanwhile, she’s taken note of the revolting right-wing zeitgeist, signing legislation that restricts transgender students’ bathroom use and cribs from Florida’s shameful Don’t Say Gay law

It’s weird, right? Donald Trump’s future has never been more precarious, and yet Republicans continue to “Single White Female” themselves straight into his political grave, vainly hoping they can secure a place in his black, bloodless knot of a heart. 

RELATED STORY: Mike Huckabee declares that LGBTQ people are the 'greatest threat' to America

Sen. Lindsey Graham has even stolen his signature spray-tanned look, apparently hoping that Trump may one day adopt him as his son. Or maybe his caddy. Or his Diet Coke gofer. Or his Diet Coke button, for that matter. (As we all know, Lindsey can squeal like a banshee when he really puts his mind to it.)

Lindsey Graham is begging people to send money to Trump again pic.twitter.com/rEvfCJM8LM

— Acyn (@Acyn) April 5, 2023

Anyhoo, it appears that even as Trump’s flame begins to dwindle, many longtime MAGA adherents, such as Sanders, are doing their darndest to keep his tiki torches burning for as long as possible. You didn’t think they’d just slink away like the cowards they are, did you? We’re gonna need a communal “Silkwood” shower to get all that godforsaken MAGA goop off us—and, unfortunately, it could take an uncomfortably long time.

Check out Aldous J. Pennyfarthing’s four-volume Trump-trashing compendium, including the finale, Goodbye, Asshat: 101 Farewell Letters to Donald Trump, at this link. Or, if you prefer a test drive, you can download the epilogue to Goodbye, Asshat for the low, low price of FREE.   

This Week in Statehouse Action: Spring Cleaning edition

Confession time.

I … [[deep breath]] am a hoarder.

I hoard web browser tabs.

I open something I mean to read or use for research, and four times out of five it just … sits. Unused. Unread.

In the Chrome window I’m using to write this week’s missive, I have 38 tabs open.

I’m not proud.

It’s time to admit that I have a problem.

So I’ve decided: Out with them.

This week, I’ll click on them, and then I’ll use them and/or close them forever.

From right to left—everything to the left of this window is important: Google docs and sheets, necessary-for-everyday-work tabs, that kind of thing.

Campaign Action

Okay, here goes.

Far-leftmost tab: Ah, yes, the GOP-controlled West Virginia legislature is trying to amend the state’s constitution to allow lawmakers to successfully execute the kind of high-court coup they failed to pull of back in 2018.

This is both weedy and based on a political event that was esoteric at the time and ancient history now.

But considering that I covered the Republicans’ attempt to oust and replace Democratic justices with GOP appointees way back when, you’re in good hands.

  • It all started in fall of 2018, when reports began to surface that the justices had indulged in exorbitant spending on expensive furniture amid lavish renovations of their chambers (in the neighborhood of $700,000 for things like fancy couches, elegant flooring, and pricey rugs).
  • Fast forward to June 2018, when prosecutors indicted Republican Justice Allen Loughry on state and federal charges (54 in all!) of fraud, witness tampering, making false statements, and more.
    • He was swiftly suspended from the bench, but he refused to resign.
      • His suspension gave Democrats an ostensible one-seat majority on the court. (Republicans made elections for the state Supreme Court officially nonpartisan after they took control of the legislature in 2014.)
    • Then, in early July, Democratic Justice Menis Ketchum announced his resignation, although he faced no criminal charges or formal allegations of ethics violations at the time. (He did later plead guilty to one count of fraud.) 
  • If impeachment proceedings had been concluded by Aug. 14 of that year, the resulting vacancies on the court would have been on the ballot in November 2018’s general election, and West Virginia voters would have had the chance to elect new justices.

But why would the GOP-controlled legislature want that when foot-dragging would let them game the state’s election deadlines and allow the Republican governor to just appoint the replacements himself?

  • In early August 2018, Republicans in the legislature finally got around to passing 14 articles of impeachment against all four remaining justices, and the full House convened the day before that Aug. 14 deadline to consider the matter.
    • Lawmakers approved 11 of the articles (mostly along party lines), but a trial still had to be conducted by the (also GOP-controlled) state Senate.
  • So by waiting until August to start proceedings, Republican lawmakers essentially guaranteed that the impeachment process couldn’t wrap up in time to let voters select replacement justices.
  • And if the state Senate had voted to remove the remaining three justices, replacement GOP appointees would have served two years on the bench before facing voters.

Remember, prior to this entire debacle, Democrats held a three-to-two majority on the Supreme Court.

  • But just in case you think this is anything but a brazen Republican attempt to usurp an entire branch of government through GOP appointments, consider this:

And why entertain timely steps to remove allegedly corrupt justices when you can slow your roll and execute a Supreme Court coup instead?

  • Anyway, in a surprise move on the morning of Aug. 14, 2018, Democratic Justice Robin Davis announced her resignation just in time to trigger a special election to replace her in November.
    • The crucial timing of her maneuver helped mitigate—but not obviate—Republican lawmakers’ scheme to fill the entire court with GOP appointees.

The drama continued for months.

  • Then-justices Margaret Workman and Allen Loughry and current Justice Beth Walker underwent impeachment trials in the state Senate.
    • Loughry resigned in November 2018, after he was found guilty on some of those 54 charges mentioned above.
    • Justice Walker, a Republican, was acquitted but censured by the Senate.
    • Workman, a Democrat, filed a lawsuit in October seeking to halt the proceedings.
      • Because it’s obviously pretty messed up for state Supreme Court justices to rule on a case impacting their own ability to remain on the bench, five district court judges were temporarily elevated to hear the case.
      • They ruled 5-0 that the House had erred in its adoption of the resolution of impeachment and, in doing so, had essentially run afoul of the whole separation-of-powers thing.
    • The GOP-run Senate tried to continue the Democrat’s impeachment trial anyway, but the justice presiding over the affair didn’t show (the court ruling effectively prohibited him from participating).
  • None of the other justices stood trial.
    • And Republicans in the legislature have been salty about it ever since.

Okay, finally, back to that pesky tab.

  • The article that piqued my interest enough to preserve it in tab form is about an amendment to the state’s constitution proposed by the GOP-controlled legislature.
    • House Joint Resolution 2 specifically prohibits any West Virginia court from intervening in any impeachment proceedings conducted by the legislature.
      • Despite the fact that there are some pretty obvious separation-of-powers issues inherent in such a proposal, the proposed amendment passed the House and is waiting on Senate action.
      • If the state Senate passes it with a two-thirds majority before the legislature adjourns on April 10, West Virginia voters will vote on it in the November 2022 election.

In a nutshell, because Republicans in the state House got sloppy in their fervor to game the impeachment of Supreme Court justices to benefit their own party (remember, the court was 3-2 Democratic when this got underway), they want to permanently usurp the power of a whole branch of government.

Something to remember when the GOP screams about Democratic efforts to expand federal courts, which, by the by, is extremely legal and would very much not require an amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

… as I found out in my next open tab, the YouTube page with this week’s episode of Daily Kos’ The Brief, for which I was a surprise guest co-host on my first day back from vacation.

But it was fun, and I learned things, and because I’m me, I managed to find a state legislative angle on D.C. statehood.

Which conveniently brings me to my next tab, which is an article about various legislatures debating the merits of (and passing resolutions for and against) Washington, D.C., becoming an actual state.

Which, by the by, it should.

  • To help raise awareness, improve understanding, and build support for statehood, organizers have encouraged lawmakers across the country to introduce resolutions in their legislatures encouraging Congress to make D.C. a state.
  • Republicans, who can’t see past their horror at the likelihood of two additional Democratic members of the U.S. Senate to consider the underlying issues of basic fairness and democracy and taxation without representation and racial equity and self-determination, are pushing their own anti-statehood resolutions in various legislatures.
    • The first legislative push against statehood reportedly came from South Dakota (a state with a population that only barely exceeds D.C.’s), where the resolution’s sponsor cited fear that two D.C. senators would “dilute” his state’s power in the chamber.
    • Meanwhile, in a hearing on Arizona’s anti-statehood resolution, GOP Rep. Kevin Payne had words for residents of the District who want a voice in Congress:

If they want representatives, move. That’s what they made Mayflower for.

Jackass

  • As of last month, Democrats in six states had introduced pro-statehood resolutions.

Of course, none of these resolutions for or against making Washington, D.C., a state have any sort of force of law.

But the fact that they’re being considered at all is quite new, and it speaks to the sudden salience of the issue.

Okay, next tab … 

  • The GOP-controlled Arkansas legislature has passed (and the governor has signed into law) a near-total ban on abortion in the state.
    • The law permits abortions only to save the life of the mother.
    • There are no exceptions for fetuses conceived via rape or incest.

And next tab … oh hey it’s another Arkansas story.

  • A sitting Arkansas state senator has left the Republican Party over its continued fealty to former President Trump.
    • Now-independent Sen. Jim Hendren, who was particularly horrified at the Trump-promoted violence at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, is the nephew of current Republican Gov. Asa Hutchinson, which is a nice touch here.

Conveniently, my next tab is story that dropped this week about the growing hold of right-wing extremism in state legislatures.

It’s certainly not the first piece on the topic. And it does a nice job of covering familiar (to you, as an erudite consumer of this missive) legislative leaders who have become standard bearers of Trump-flavored Republicanism.

Like our old pal, Michigan Senate Majority Leader Mike Shirkey.

  • You remember, the Mike Shirkey initially feigned outrage at the Capitol violence on Jan. 6 and then privately met with one of the organizers of the earlier, practice riot at the Michigan capitol to discuss the poor “optics” of the situation.
  • The Mike Shirkey who publicly cozied up with members of violent militias and spoke at one of their rallies. 
  • The Mike Shirkey who was caught on video claiming that the Capitol riot was a “hoax” staged to make Trump supporters look bad.
  • The Mike Shirkey who’s arguably the most powerful Republican in Michigan.

But of course, he’s far from alone.

We can’t forget Arizona state Rep. Mark Finchem.

Anyway, all this is to say that GOP lawmakers’ extremism might once have been brushed off as a fringe-y distraction with few material consequences, but we can’t afford to take this with anything but grave seriousness now. The Trump wing of the Republican Party holds real power in statehouses.

But not only does their rise to power poses an existential threat in statehouses across the country; the upcoming round of redistricting could cement—even expand—that power for the rest of the decade.

[[shudder]]

Welp, I didn’t clear out all those unused tabs, but I made progress! There’s a little breathing room in my browser window.

I’ll take my wins where I can get them, and you should, too. Maybe knock off early, call it a week, spend some time closing some of your, ah, spiritual browser tabs.

Just print this out and show it to your boss, she probably has more tabs open than I do.

Voting Rights Roundup: The House’s new voting rights bill now curtails gerrymandering right away

Programming Note: The Voting Rights Roundup will be taking a break the week of March 13 but will return the following week.

Leading Off

Congress: On Wednesday, House Democrats voted 220-210 to once again pass H.R. 1, the “For the People Act,” the most important set of voting and election reforms since the historic Voting Rights Act was adopted in 1965. It also includes a major modification to provisions that would curtail gerrymandering, ensuring that they'll take effect right away. All Democrats except Mississippi Rep. Bennie Thompson voted for the bill, while all Republicans voted against it.

H.R. 1 would implement transformative changes to federal elections by (1) removing barriers to expanding access to voting and securing the integrity of the vote; (2) establishing public financing in House elections to level the playing field; and (3) banning congressional gerrymandering by requiring that every state create a nonpartisan redistricting commission subject to nonpartisan redistricting criteria.

These reforms, which House Democrats previously passed in 2019, face a challenging path in the Senate given Democrats’ narrow majority and uncertainty over whether they can overcome a GOP filibuster, but their adoption is critical for preserving American democracy amid unprecedented attack by Republican extremists both in and outside Congress. Senate Democrats have announced that they plan to hold hearings on the bill on March 24, and Majority Leader Chuck Schumer has committed to holding an eventual floor vote.

Using Congress’ power to regulate Senate and House elections under the Elections Clause and enforce anti-discrimination laws under the 14th Amendment, the bill would:

  • Require states to establish nonpartisan redistricting commissions for congressional redistricting;
  • Establish nonpartisan redistricting criteria such as a partisan fairness provision that courts can enforce starting immediately no matter what institution draws the maps;
  • Establish automatic voter registration at an array of state agencies;
  • Establish same-day voter registration;
  • Allow online voter registration;
  • Allow 16- and 17-year-olds to pre-register so they'll be on the rolls when they turn 18;
  • Allow state colleges and universities to serve as registration agencies;
  • Ban states from purging eligible voters' registration simply for infrequent voting;
  • Establish two weeks of in-person early voting, including availability on Sundays and outside of normal business hours;
  • Standardize hours within states for opening and closing polling places on Election Day, with exceptions to let cities set longer hours in municipal races;
  • Require paper ballots filled by hand or machines that use them as official records and let voters verify their choices;
  • Grant funds to states to upgrade their election security infrastructure;
  • Provide prepaid postage on mail ballots;
  • Allow voters to turn in their mail ballot in person if they choose;
  • Allow voters to track their absentee mail ballots;
  • End prison gerrymandering by counting prisoners at their last address (rather than where they're incarcerated) for the purposes of redistricting;
  • End felony disenfranchisement for those on parole, probation, or post-sentence, and require such citizens to be supplied with registration forms and informed their voting rights have been restored;
  • Provide public financing for House campaigns in the form of matching small donations at a six-for-one rate;
  • Expand campaign finance disclosure requirements to mitigate Citizens United;
  • Ban corporations from spending for campaign purposes unless the corporation has established a process for determining the political will of its shareholders; and
  • Make it a crime to mislead voters with the intention of preventing them from voting.

Importantly, the bill that won approval on the full floor on Wednesday contained critical amendments strengthening its anti-gerrymandering provisions. While the original version would not have required states to use independent commissions and nonpartisan redistricting criteria until 2030, the revised bill would implement them right away. And even if states don't have enough time to set up new commissions ahead of the 2022 elections, they would still be banned from drawing maps that unduly favor a party, which a court could then enforce.​

Campaign Action

​Ending Republicans’ ability to gerrymander is of the utmost importance after Republicans won the power to redistrict two-to-three times as many congressional districts as Democrats after the 2020 elections. If congressional Democrats don’t act, Republican dominance in redistricting may practically guarantee that Republicans retake the House in 2022 even if Democrats once again win more votes, an outcome that could lead to congressional Republicans more seriously trying to overturn a Democratic victory in the 2024 Electoral College vote than they did in January, when two-thirds of the House caucus voted to overturn Biden's election.

If this bill becomes law, Republicans would lose that unfettered power to rig the House playing field to their advantage. Instead, reform proponents would gain the ability to challenge unfair maps in court over illegal partisan discrimination, and the bill would eventually require states to create independent redistricting commissions that would take the process out of the hands of self-interested legislators entirely.

Protecting the right to vote is just as paramount when Republican lawmakers across the country have introduced hundreds of bills to adopt new voting restrictions by furthering the lies Donald Trump told about the election that led directly to January's insurrection at the Capitol. With Republican legislatures likely to pass many of these bills into law—and the Supreme Court's conservative partisans poised to further undermine existing protections for voting rights—congressional action is an absolute must to protect the ability of voters to cast their ballots.

The most important remaining hurdle, however, is the legislative filibuster: The fate of these reforms will depend on Senate Democrats either abolishing or curtailing it. Progressive activists have relaunched a movement to eliminate the filibuster entirely, while some experts have suggested that Democrats could carve out an exception for voting rights legislation. Either way, Democrats will need to address the filibuster in some fashion, since Senate Republicans have made it clear they will not provide the support necessary to reach a 60-vote supermajority to pass H.R. 1 into law.

Redistricting

Minnesota: A group of Minnesota citizens, including a veteran redistricting expert and a former state supreme court justice, filed a lawsuit in state court seeking to prevent Minnesota's current congressional and legislative districts from being used next year if state lawmakers are unable to pass new districts by Feb. 15. That outcome is likely given that Democrats hold the state House and governorship while Republicans hold the state Senate. Similarly divided governments have led the courts to intervene to draw new maps in each of the last five decades.

New Mexico: A committee in New Mexico's Democratic-run state Senate has unanimously passed a bill that would establish a bipartisan advisory redistricting commission to handle redistricting for Congress, the state legislature, the state Public Regulation Commission, and the state Public Education Commission. Democratic state House Speaker Brian Egolf endorsed the proposal after previously opposing a competing reform measure that passed unanimously in state House committee in early February.

The Senate bill would create a commission with seven members, with four chosen by the leadership of both parties in each of the state's two legislative chambers, two unaffiliated members selected by the state Ethics Commission, and a final seventh member named by the Ethics Commission who would be a retired appellate judge and would serve as commission chair. No more than three commissioners could be members of the same party, and anyone who is or has served as an officeholder, candidate, or lobbyist (or whose close family members have) in the two years prior to redistricting could not participate.

Commissioners would devise three proposals for each type of office and hold public hearings to discuss them. Districts would have to be drawn according to the following criteria: equal population; legislative districts cannot split precincts; adherence to the federal Voting Rights Act and its protections of voters of color; compactness; preservation of communities of interest and local government jurisdictions; and preservation of the cores of existing districts. The criteria apparently do not prohibit mapmakers from considering partisanship or incumbency.

Once commissioners have come up with three different proposals for each office and held public hearings, they would submit the maps to the legislature for approval by lawmakers. The bill doesn't mention any prohibition on lawmakers amending the proposed districts, meaning this reform measure could nevertheless result in legislators adopting gerrymandered districts.

South Dakota: Last month, the League of Women Voters and other good-government organizations announced a plan to put a constitutional amendment on the ballot next year that would establish an independent redistricting commission. Supporters would need to file just under 34,000 signatures, roughly 10% of the total vote for governor in the most recent election, by this November in order to get onto the ballot.

Since South Dakota only has a single statewide congressional district, the proposal would only affect legislative redistricting. The measure would create a nine-member commission chosen by the state Board of Elections with no more than three members belonging to the same party, though the proposal is vague on the specifics of the selection process.

Mapmakers would have to adhere to several criteria, which prioritize compactness, followed by preserving communities of interest and keeping counties and cities undivided to the extent practicable. Commissioners would be barred from considering partisanship or incumbency. While Republican lawmakers would still have the opportunity to draw new districts for the 2022 elections even if the amendment passes, the commission would sweep into action immediately, crafting new maps in 2023 for the 2024 elections and then in years ending in "1" every 10 years afterward.

Voting Access Expansions

Congress: House members are set to introduce a bill with bipartisan support that would make Puerto Rico a state following a referendum last November in which voters backed statehood by a 52-48 margin. The bill's 48 sponsors in the House are mostly Democrats but also include around a dozen Republicans, several of whom are from Florida, which is home to a large Puerto Rican population. However, even if the House passes the bill, it will face a challenging path to overcoming a likely filibuster by Senate Republicans, as only Florida Sens. Marco Rubio and Rick Scott are reportedly supporting the bill on the GOP side.

Delaware: Democratic state Rep. Bryan Shupe has announced he plans to introduce a bill later this month that would end Delaware's unusual system that requires voters to register twice: once for state and federal elections and separately for local races. This system regularly leads to situations where voters who are registered in state elections try to vote in their local elections only to find out on Election Day that they can't vote. Democrats hold both legislative chambers and the governor's office in Delaware.

Idaho: Idaho's Republican-run state Senate has unanimously passed a bill to set up a standardized process for requiring local election officials to contact voters and give them a chance to fix any errors with their absentee ballots such as a voter signature supposedly not matching the one on file.

Maryland: Maryland's Democratic-run state House has passed a bill to create a semi-permanent list that will automatically mail absentee ballots in all future elections to voters who opt in. A handful of other states have similar systems, though this proposal differs in that voters who don't vote in two consecutive election cycles would be removed from the list and have to reapply.

Meanwhile, state House Democrats passed a bill with some bipartisan support to strengthen voting access on college campuses, military bases, retirement homes, and other "large residential communities." Sites like these would be able to request an in-person voting location, and colleges would be required to establish voter registration efforts on campus and give students an excused absence to vote if needed. The bill would also let military service members register online using their identification smart cards issued by the Defense Department.

New Mexico: New Mexico's Democratic-run state House has unanimously passed a bill that aims to protect Native American voting access in a variety of ways. Among other provisions, the bill requires that every reservation or other Native community have an in-person polling place, which fills an important gap since many Native communities lack reliable postal service for mail voting and also have a large proportion of residents who lack a driver's license or access to other transportation options.

New York: Following its recent passage in the state Senate, a bill has been approved in committee by Assembly Democrats that would automatically restore voting rights to everyone who is not currently incarcerated, which would permanently end the disenfranchisement of parolees. Currently, many parolees are only able to vote because Democratic Gov. Andrew Cuomo issued an executive order two years ago to restore the rights of people on parole who were convicted of certain crimes, meaning their right to vote could be rescinded by a future governor unless this bill passes.

New Jersey: New Jersey's Democratic-run Assembly has passed a bill with bipartisan support to create an in-person early voting period after their counterparts in the state Senate passed similar legislation last week. The Assembly's bill would adopt 10 days of early voting for general elections starting in November, five days for presidential primaries, and three days for all other primaries and any municipal elections taking place in May. The measure would require each of New Jersey's 21 counties to establish between five and 10 early voting locations.

Utah: Utah's GOP-run legislature has unanimously passed a bill creating a system where voters can track the status of their mail ballots via email or text message. Utah is one of a handful of states that mails ballots to all active registered voters by default.

Virginia: Both chambers of Virginia's Democratic-run legislature have passed a constitutional amendment that would abolish felony disenfranchisement for everyone who is not currently incarcerated. Currently, state law imposes a lifetime ban on voting by anyone convicted of a felony, but that system has been curtailed because Democratic Gov. Ralph Northam and his Democratic predecessor issued executive orders to automatically restore voting rights upon completion of any prison, parole, or probation sentences. Those orders, however, could be rescinded by any future Republican governor.

To become law, legislators would have to pass this same amendment again after the 2021 elections before it would have to win approval in a November 2022 voter referendum. A separate amendment that would have abolished felony disenfranchisement entirely, including for people currently in prison, failed to advance before a key deadline.

Voter Suppression

Supreme Court: On Tuesday, the U.S. Supreme Court heard a case over two Arizona voting restrictions that could deal a crippling blow to what remains of the Voting Rights Act after the high court's conservatives gutted a key part of the law in 2013. Observers widely agreed that the court's conservative majority was leaning toward upholding the Republican-backed voting restrictions, but it was unclear from oral arguments just how gravely the court could undermine the standards used to enforce the Voting Rights Act.

This case involves two Arizona laws that the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals found had both the effect and intent of discriminating against Black, Latino, and Native American voters. If both findings are overturned, it may become impossible to challenge similar laws in the future.

Last year, the 9th Circuit blocked both measures: one that bars counting votes cast in the wrong precinct but in the right county, and another that limits who can turn in another person's absentee mail ballot on a voter's behalf.

Arizona had largely transitioned to mail voting even before the pandemic, but the 9th Circuit observed that only 18% of Native American voters receive mail service, and many living on remote reservations lack reliable transportation options. That led some voters to ask others in their community to turn their completed ballots in, which Republicans have sought to deride as "ballot harvesting" in an attempt to delegitimize the practice. The invalidated law had limited who could handle another person's mail ballot to just close relatives, caregivers, or postal service workers.

The 9th Circuit's ruling also invalidated a separate provision prohibiting out-of-precinct voting, in which a voter shows up and casts a ballot at the wrong polling place but in the right county on Election Day. Under the invalidated law, voters in such circumstances could only cast a provisional ballot, which were automatically rejected if it was later confirmed that the voter had indeed showed up at the wrong polling place.

This decision relied on Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, which prohibits laws that have a discriminatory effect against racial minorities regardless of whether there was an intent to discriminate. The finding of a discriminatory effect is critical because it's often much more difficult if not impossible to prove that lawmakers acted with illicit intent, whereas statistical analysis can more readily prove that a law has a disparate negative impact on protected racial groups.

Consequently, it's this so-called "effects test" that is the key remaining plank of the Voting Rights Act following the Supreme Court's notorious 2013 decision in Shelby County v. Holder. Some legal observers remained optimistic that the worst may not come to pass, since Arizona Republicans' oral arguments did not touch on the constitutionality of the VRA's effects test. However, others have noted that even if the effects test isn't formally struck down, the Supreme Court could make it so difficult to comply with the requirements to prove discrimination that the VRA would nevertheless become meaningless.

In one revealing exchange, conservative Justice Amy Coney Barrett asked Republican attorney Michael Carvin why the state GOP was even party to this case. Carvin responded with an admission that the 9th Circuit decision striking down the two voting restrictions "puts us at a competitive disadvantage relative to Democrats" because "every extra vote they get ... hurts us."

Arizona: Republicans in the Arizona Senate have passed a bill that could purge roughly 200,000 voters from the state's "permanent" mail voting list, which is supposed to automatically mail a ballot in all future elections to participating voters and has proven very popular since its implementation. The bill would remove anyone who doesn't vote in two consecutive election cycles, even if they still remain eligible to vote. Republicans only hold a two-seat majority in both the state House and Senate, so they would need every member on board to overcome Democratic opposition.

In the state House, meanwhile, Republicans have passed a bill that would require people and groups who register more than 25 voters in a given year to themselves register with the state, mandating that they put unique identifying numbers on every registration form they submit. Voter advocacy groups have condemned this bill and warn that it could lead to registration forms being rejected.

Alabama: Alabama House Republicans have passed a bill that would ban local election officials from establishing curbside voting or setting up voting machines outside of polling places, which would make it harder for people with disabilities and limited mobility to cast their ballots.

Arkansas: Republican Gov. Asa Hutchinson has signed a bill into law that makes Arkansas' voter ID law much stricter, making it one of the first of many Republican-backed voting restrictions under consideration nationwide to become law following the 2020 elections. The bill removes the option for voters who lack an ID to vote by signing a sworn statement under penalty of perjury, instead mandating an ID in order to have one's vote counted.

Georgia: On Monday, state House Republicans passed a far-reaching bill to enact several new voting restrictions that would:

  • Require that voters provide the number on their driver's license, state ID, or a photocopy of their ID when requesting an absentee ballot and a photocopy of their ID when returning an absentee ballot;
  • Limit weekend early voting;
  • Restrict absentee ballot drop boxes to only the inside of early voting locations or county election offices, making them unavailable outside of regular business hours;
  • Set a minimum of one drop box per 200,000 registered voters (other states such as California require one drop box per 15,000 voters);
  • Shorten the runoff period in federal elections from nine weeks to four weeks, with the apparent intent of giving campaigns less time to mobilize voters (instant runoffs would be used for overseas civilian and military voters to avoid running afoul of federal law mandating that their ballots be sent out 45 days before an election);
  • Ban state officials from mailing unsolicited absentee ballot request forms to all voters after Republican Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger did so in the 2020 primary;
  • Disqualify ballots that were cast in the wrong precinct but in the right county, which currently may be counted as provisional ballots;
  • Limit mobile early voting buses to only emergency situations;
  • Bar counties from receiving private funding to help administer elections; and
  • Block officials from distributing food and drinks to voters waiting in line to vote.

Meanwhile, in the state Senate, Republicans passed a bill in committee to end no-excuse absentee voting for voters under age 65, who typically lean more Democratic than older voters. Late last month, Republicans in the full Senate also passed a bill that would give the state the power to take over local election boards that supposedly fail to meet certain standards, which Democrats condemned as a way to let Republicans usurp control over election boards in Democratic-leaning counties.

Montana: State House Republicans have passed a bill over Democratic objections that would bar anyone who isn't a family or household member, caregiver, or an "acquaintance" who is a registered voter in the same county from turning in another person's ballot, thereby preventing voter advocacy groups or political campaigns from organizing ballot collection efforts.

A previous Republican-backed law imposing similar restrictions was blocked in court last year for discriminating against Native American voters, who often live on remote rural reservations where mail service and transportation access are limited. This latest bill may therefore also face difficulty surviving a likely lawsuit.

New Hampshire: New Hampshire's Republican-run state Senate has passed a bill along party lines to add a voter ID requirement for requesting and casting absentee ballots, sending it to the state House, which is also controlled by the GOP. New Hampshire is one of several states where Republicans are considering extending voter ID requirements to absentee ballots after Democrats disproportionately voted by mail in the 2020 elections.

Wyoming: State House Republicans have passed a bill establishing a voter ID requirement, sending it to the state Senate, where Republicans are also likely to pass it.

Ballot Measures

Idaho: Idaho's Republican-run state Senate has passed a bill that would make it all but impossible for progressive initiatives to get on the ballot by requiring proponents to submit voter signatures equivalent to 6% of registered voters in each of the state's 35 legislative districts instead of 18, the current requirement.

The bill, which would take effect immediately, would disproportionately impact progressives because left-leaning voters are heavily concentrated in a handful of denser urban districts. Liberal organizers would therefore have to canvas in rural districts where receptive voters are few and far between. Conservatives, by contrast, would have an easier time canvassing for signatures in cities because, even if right-leaning voters represent a relatively small proportion of voters, they live in closer proximity to one another.

Republicans in Idaho have advanced similar restrictions on initiatives in recent years as a reaction to successful efforts by progressives to expand Medicaid and increase public education funding at the ballot box during the last decade. Fearing a lawsuit, GOP Gov. Brad Little vetoed a similar bill in 2019 but the Senate passed this most recent bill with a veto-proof majority.

South Dakota: South Dakota's Republican-run legislature voted this week to put a constitutional amendment on the June 2022 primary ballot that would institute a 60% supermajority requirement for ballot initiatives that raise taxes or spend more than $10 million in public funds within a five-year period. The amendment would not, however, require a supermajority to cut taxes or spending. Democratic legislators blasted Republicans for trying to manipulate the election to their advantage by placing the amendment on the primary ballot instead of sending it before voters in the general election, noting that turnout in the 2020 primary was just one-third as high as it was last November.

Republicans have repeatedly tried to enact restrictions on ballot initiatives in recent years after voters approved an initiative in 2016 that would have placed strict limits on lobbying, created an independent ethics commission, and implemented a public campaign finance system that would have given each voter a voucher to donate to their preferred candidates.

In 2017, Republicans resorted to declaring an actual state of emergency to enable the legislature to immediately repeal the voter-approved ethics law and make it immune to a veto referendum, meaning supporters of the reform needed double the signatures to put a constitutional amendment on the ballot to restore the measure. Although they did just that in 2018, then-Republican Attorney General Marty Jackley gave the new amendment a ballot summary that said it would "likely be challenged on constitutional grounds," and voters rejected the second ethics commission amendment 55-45.

Electoral System Reform

Burlington, VT: Voters in Vermont's largest city of Burlington voted by 64-36 margin to approve a ballot measure that will adopt instant-runoff voting in City Council elections starting next year. This vote comes just over a decade after Burlington voters narrowly repealed instant-runoff voting for mayoral elections after it had been used to elect the mayor in 2006 and 2009. Before it can take effect, though, it must be approved by the Democratic-run legislature and Republican Gov. Phil Scott.

Senate Elections

Kentucky: Republican state senators have passed a bill that would require the governor to fill any future U.S. Senate vacancies with an appointee from the same party as the departing senator.

Currently, Kentucky's governor is Democrat Andy Beshear while both of its senators are Republicans, meaning this bill would prevent Beshear from replacing either McConnell or fellow Sen. Rand Paul with a Democrat if either were to leave office. Republicans easily hold enough seats to override a potential veto by Beshear. The bill would allow the party committee of the departing lawmaker to send a list of three names to the governor, who would be required to pick a replacement from that list.

Ever since Beshear's narrow 2019 win, Kentucky Republicans have advanced a series of moves to strip him of his executive power, and this proposal is part of the same partisan effort to constrain Beshear's authority. However, despite the GOP's self-interested motives, the proposed system is already used in many states for legislative vacancies and a handful of states for Senate vacancies and better ensures the will of voters is respected.

Voting Rights Roundup: Trump order to remove noncitizens from key census data sparks lawsuits

Leading Off

2020 Census: Donald Trump signed a new executive order on Tuesday directing the census to exclude undocumented immigrants from the data that determines how many House seats and Electoral College votes each state will get following the 2020 census.

Within days, civil rights advocates and Democratic officials filed separate federal lawsuits arguing both that Trump's order violates the Constitution because the 14th Amendment mandates counting the "whole number of persons" for reapportionment and that it intentionally discriminates against Latinos.

This order comes after Trump's failed attempt to add a citizenship question to the census last year, a move that documents showed was motivated because GOP operatives believed it would be "advantageous to Republicans and non-Hispanic whites" in redistricting.

Campaign Action

​While that effort imploded, Republicans still aim to let states such as Texas draw districts based strictly on the adult citizen population instead of the more diverse traditional total population, which would shift representation away from Democrats and Latinos in states with large immigrant populations. To that end, Trump issued a separate executive order last year directing the Census Bureau to match existing administrative records with 2020 census responses in order to determine citizenship status, a step that prompted litigation of its own.

But while the Supreme Court could ultimately allow the use of citizenship data for redistricting, it's unlikely to do so for reapportionment: A unanimous 2016 ruling saw even arch-conservative Justice Samuel Alito acknowledge that the 14th Amendment required using the total population for reapportionment purposes. But even if the justices did overturn hundreds of years of precedent, excluding undocumented immigrants from reapportionment would likely have a far smaller partisan impact nationally than citizen-based redistricting would within states such as Texas.

However, Trump's continued push for this change shows that the GOP will not give up in its fight to exclude noncitizens from redistricting and representation, and further litigation is certain. Additionally, Trump asked Congress for $1 billion in the next pandemic spending bill to ensure a "timely census," which suggests Trump is backing away from a potential delay in the deadlines by which the administration must deliver apportionment and redistricting data to the states.

The Census Bureau has previously said it didn't expect to be able to meet its year-end deadline to give the White House its reapportionment data, or the March 31, 2021 deadline for sending redistricting data to the states. Any such delays mean that Joe Biden could block the release of citizenship data if he defeats Trump and takes office on Jan. 20. However, if the first batch of census data is released on time, that would mean Trump would still be in office, meaning opponents would have to rely on court challenges to block him.

Voter Registration and Voting Access

Deaths: Following the death of Democratic Rep. John Lewis, who was one of the nation's most prominent supporters of voting rights both during the civil rights movement of the 1960s and his long career in Congress, Senate Democrats introduced a bill named in Lewis' honor to restore the protections of the Voting Rights Act that the Supreme Court gutted in 2013, a bill that House Democrats already passed last year.

Should the bill become law, it would be a fitting way to enshrine Lewis' legacy in public life. The Atlantic’s Adam Serwer aptly called Lewis “an American Founder” for his role in creating the modern American republic, which was no less than radically transformed by the passage of the Civil Rights Act and Voting Rights Act. These two landmark pieces of legislation ended the authoritarian one-party oligarchy that existed in the South under Jim Crow and finally established America as a liberal democracy nationwide—almost 200 years after the country's founding.

Lewis was one the leading figures in the civil rights movement for Black Americans from an early age. When he was just 23, he was the youngest speaker at the 1963 March on Washington, where Martin Luther King gave his legendary "I Have a Dream" speech. Two years later, he marched for voting rights in Selma, Alabama in 1965. There, law enforcement reacted to the peaceful protest by brutally attacking the marchers and beat Lewis nearly to death, fracturing his skull. But even real and repeatedly threatened violence did not deter his activism.

The events in Selma became known as Bloody Sunday, and TV news audiences around the country were so shocked by images of police brutality against the marchers that it galvanized the ultimately successful effort to pass the Voting Rights Act, which became law on Aug. 6, 1965. Civil rights leaders like Lewis and King deemed the Voting Rights Act the most important achievement of their movement because it protected the right that helped secure all the others that they were fighting for.

Lewis' career of activism for the cause of civil rights did not end with the 1960s, nor did his role as a protest figure end with his election to Congress in the 1980s: Even in his final decade, he led a sit-in on the House floor to protest the GOP's refusal to pass gun safety measures after a horrific mass shooting in Orlando left 49 dead and 53 wounded in 2016. Lewis would steadfastly make the case that the struggle for civil rights was an unending one, and his leadership inspired countless people who came after him. You can read more about Lewis' lifetime of activism in The New York Times and The Atlanta Constitution.

New York: Both chambers of New York's Democratic-run legislature have passed a bill to enact automatic voter registration, sending the measure to Democratic Gov. Andrew Cuomo for his likely signature. Senate Democrats had approved similar measures both this year and last, but Assembly Democrats refused to sign off until changes were made.

Part of the compromise between the chambers means the law wouldn't go into effect until 2023. However, automatic registration would involve a number of state agencies beyond just the DMV, which is critical since New York has one of the lowest proportions of residents who drive of any state.

Separately, Senate Democrats also passed a constitutional amendment that would let 17-year-olds vote in primaries if they will turn 18 by the general election, a policy that many other states have already adopted. The amendment would have to pass both chambers before and after the 2020 elections before needing the approval of voters in a referendum.

Felony Disenfranchisement

District of Columbia: Mayor Muriel Bowser has signed a bill into law that immediately restores voting rights for several thousand citizens and will require officials to provide incarcerated citizens with registration forms and absentee ballots starting next year. However, because the bill was passed as emergency legislation, it must be reauthorized after 90 days, though Council members plan to make it permanent soon.

With this law's passage, D.C. becomes only the third jurisdiction in the country after Maine and Vermont to maintain the right to vote for incarcerated citizens. It is also the first place to do so with a large community of color: The District is 46% African American, and more than 90% of D.C. residents currently disenfranchised are Black.

Voter Suppression

Alabama: The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled 2-1 to uphold a lower court ruling dismissing the NAACP's challenge to Alabama Republicans' voter ID law. The two judges in the majority, who were both appointed by Republicans, ruled that "no reasonable factfinder could find that Alabama’s voter ID law is unconstitutionally discriminatory," even though Judge Darrin Gayles, an Obama appointee, noted in dissent that one white GOP lawmaker who supported passing the law said that the lack of an ID requirement was "very beneficial to the Black power structure and the rest of the Democrats."

Republicans passed this law in 2011 to require a photo voter ID in nearly all circumstances, with the only exception being if two election officials sign an affidavit that they know the voter. However, the law didn't go into effect until 2014, after the Supreme Court's conservative majority gutted a key protection of the Voting Rights Act that had required states such as Alabama with a history of discriminatory voting laws to "pre-clear" all changes to voting laws and procedures with the Justice Department before implementing them.

The plaintiffs sued in 2015 by arguing that the law violated the Voting Rights Act and Constitution and presented evidence that Black voters were less likely to possess acceptable forms of ID than white voters. That year, Republicans sparked a backlash by trying to close 31 of the state's 75 driver's licensing offices, which subsequent reporting revealed was an effort by GOP Gov. Robert Bentley, who later resigned in disgrace, to pressure his legislative opponents, but Republicans ultimately reversed course amid litigation.

Election expert Rick Hasen called this latest decision "very troubling" because it ruled unequivocally for GOP officials without letting the case proceed to trial, despite the plaintiffs' evidence of both the intent and effect of racial discrimination against Black voters. The plaintiffs could seek to request that all judges on the 11th Circuit reconsider the ruling, or they could appeal directly to the Supreme Court. However, with Republican appointees holding majorities on both courts, their chance of success appears small.

Michigan: A panel of three judges on the Michigan Court of Appeals has ruled 2-1 along ideological lines to uphold Republican-backed voting restrictions that Democrats were challenging. The ruling maintains a limitation on what counts as proof of residency for voter registration. It also rejects Democrats' demand that the state start automatically pre-registering all citizens under age 18 who conduct business with the state's driver's licensing agency so that they will be automatically added to the rolls when they turn 18. Currently, only citizens aged 17-and-a-half or older are automatically registered.

Democrats have not yet indicated whether they will appeal to Michigan's Supreme Court. The high court has a 4-3 Republican majority, though one of the GOP justices has been a swing vote when similar issues have come before the court.

Tennessee: Voting rights advocates have filed a lawsuit in state court to require Tennessee officials to comply with a 1981 law that restores voting rights to people convicted of a felony in another state if they have had their rights restored in that state. The plaintiffs argue that the state's Republican-run government has failed to educate affected voters of the ability to regain their rights. They also charge that the state is requiring the payment of any legal fines or fees, even though such repayment isn't required under the law.

Texas: A federal district court has rejected a Republican motion to dismiss a Democratic-backed lawsuit seeking to require that Texas allow voters to register online via a third-party website. The case concerns the website Vote.org, which allows applicants to fill out a registration form and then (on its end) automatically prints it and mails it to local election officials. However, the GOP-run secretary of state's office rejected thousands of such applications shortly before the registration deadline in 2018 on the grounds that the signatures were transmitted electronically rather than signed with pen on paper.

Democrats argue that these rejections violate both state and federal law. They note that the secretary of state already allows electronic signatures if they're part of applications when voters register in-person through the state's driver's licensing agency. Texas Republicans have long resisted online registration, making it one of just a handful of states that doesn't offer it to most voters. As a result, the Lone Star State is home to a majority of the Americans who live in states without full online registration.

Electoral Reform

Massachusetts: Massachusetts officials have approved an initiative for the November ballot that would enact a statute implementing instant-runoff voting in elections for Congress and state office. It would also apply to a limited number of local contests such as countywide posts for district attorney and sheriff, but not those at the municipal level, which is the primary unit of local government in New England. If adopted, the new system would come into effect in time for the 2022 elections and would make Massachusetts the second state after Maine to adopt this reform.

Redistricting

New York: Democratic legislators in New York swiftly passed a constitutional amendment with little debate that would increase the likelihood that they could exercise full control over redistricting after 2020 and gerrymander the state's congressional and legislative maps. However, the amendment's provisions are more complicated than an attempt to just seek partisan advantage, and it still has a ways to go before becoming law.

New York has a bipartisan redistricting commission that proposes maps to legislators for their approval. Legislative leaders from both parties choose the members, and the 2014 amendment that enshrined it in the state constitution requires two-thirds supermajorities for legislators to disregard the commission's proposals and enact their own if one party controls both legislative chambers, as Democrats currently do. The biggest partisan impact this new amendment would have involves lowering that threshold to three-fifths.

Democrats hold a two-thirds supermajority in the Assembly but currently lack that in the state Senate. However, they exceed three-fifths in the upper chamber, meaning they would gain control over redistricting if the amendment were law today. However, there's a good chance the lowered threshold would be irrelevant for the next round of redistricting.

That's because Democrats have a strong opportunity to gain a Senate supermajority in November, thanks to a large number of Republican retirements in swing districts and an overall political climate that favors Democrats. Still, lowering the supermajority requirement to three-fifths could still prove decisive in the future, especially if Democrats fall short of their hopes this fall, so it's therefore fair to describe the move as an attempt by Democrats to gain greater control over redistricting.

Nevertheless, several other provisions in this amendment promote nonpartisan goals that would strengthen redistricting protections regardless of who draws the lines, complicating the case for whether or not New York would be better off in the short term if the amendment were to become law. Most importantly, the amendment would let New York conduct its own census for redistricting purposes if the federal census does not count undocumented immigrants, as Trump has ordered.

It also enshrines an existing statute that bans prison gerrymandering by counting incarcerated people for redistricting purposes at their last address instead of in prisons that are largely located in whiter rural upstate communities, restoring representation to urban communities of color. In addition, it freezes the number of senators at the current 63; in the past, lawmakers have expanded the size of the body in an attempt to gain a partisan advantage. Finally, it sharply limits the splitting of cities between Senate districts, something the GOP used extensively in their successful bid to win power (supported by several renegade Democrats) after the last round of redistricting.

Democrats would need to pass this same amendment again in 2021 before putting it on the ballot as a referendum that year, meaning it could pass without GOP support, but it would still require voter approval. If enacted, it would immediately take effect.

North Carolina: Earlier this month, Democratic Gov. Roy Cooper signed a bill passed almost unanimously by North Carolina's Republican legislature to undo one of the GOP's many gerrymandering schemes, specifically one involving gerrymandering along racial lines in district court elections in Mecklenburg County. The GOP's about-face came as Republicans were facing a near-certain loss in state court for infringing on Black voters' rights in violation of the Voting Rights Act.

Mecklenburg County is a Democratic stronghold that's home to Charlotte and more than one million residents. In 2018, Republican lawmakers changed Mecklenburg's procedures for judicial elections from a countywide system to one in which the county is split into separate judicial districts, even though all of the elected judges still retain countywide jurisdiction. The GOP's 2018 law gerrymandered the districts in an attempt to elect more white Republicans in place of multiple Black Democratic incumbents—precisely what came to pass that November.

Republicans had already agreed to revert back to countywide elections for 2020 while their case proceeded, but the lawsuit is moot now that Republicans have repealed the law in question. This GOP defeat means Republican legislators this past decade have lost lawsuits over their gerrymandering once or even multiple times at virtually every level of government in North Carolina, including for Congress, state legislature, county commission, city council, local school board, and, as here, judicial districts.

Ballot Access

West Virginia: A federal district court has denied the GOP's motion for summary judgment in a lawsuit in which Democrats are challenging a law that gives the party that won the last presidential election in the state—which has voted Republican in every race since 2000—the top spot on the ballot in every partisan contest. Barring a settlement, the case will now proceed to trial, which was previously set for July 27.

The plaintiffs argue that this system violates the First and 14th Amendments because candidates listed first can enjoy a boost in support that can prove decisive in close elections, particularly in downballot races where voters have much less information about the candidates than they do for the top of the ticket.

Court Cases

Maine: Maine Republicans have filed yet another lawsuit in federal court arguing that instant-runoff voting violates the U.S. Constitution and should be blocked in November, when it will be used in all federal races. Democratic Secretary of State Matt Dunlap recently determined that Republicans were roughly 2,000 voter signatures shy of the 63,000 signatures needed to put a veto referendum on the ballot in November that would suspend the use of IRV for the Electoral College until voters weigh in, but the GOP will separately challenge his decision in state court.

The federal suit is just the latest in the GOP's long running campaign against IRV after voters approved it in a 2016 ballot initiative for state and congressional races (a state court later blocked it for state-level general elections). However, they may not have much more success than former Republican Rep. Bruce Poliquin did when he argued that IRV was unconstitutional after he lost the 2018 election to Democratic Rep. Jared Golden once all instant-runoff calculations were completed. In that case, a federal court thoroughly rejected Poliquin's arguments that IRV violated voters' First and 14th Amendment rights.

ELECTION CHANGES

Please bookmark our litigation tracker for a complete summary of the latest developments in every lawsuit regarding changes to elections and voting procedures as a result of the coronavirus.

Arkansas: A panel of three GOP-appointed judges on the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals has unanimously overturned a district court ruling that made it easier for redistricting reformers to gather signatures for a ballot initiative to create an independent redistricting commission. The lower court's ruling, which the 8th Circuit had already temporarily blocked while the appeal proceeded, had suspended a requirement that voter petition signatures be witnessed in-person, enabling supporters to sign the forms at home and mail them in.

Republican Secretary of State John Thurston had recently thrown out all signatures gathered for the redistricting reform initiative and a separate initiative to adopt a variant of instant-runoff voting, and initiative supporters are separately challenging that decision in state court. Organizers have not announced whether they will appeal this latest federal court ruling.

New Hampshire: Republican Gov. Chris Sununu has signed a law passed by New Hampshire's Democratic-run legislature that will allow voters to use a single application to receive absentee ballots for both the Sept. 8 state primary and Nov. 3 general election.

North Carolina: North Carolina's Board of Elections has issued a rule that every county this fall must have at least one early voting location for every 20,000 registered voters and that smaller counties only operating one location must provide for a backup location and extra staff as a precaution.

Oregon: A panel of three judges on the 9th Circuit Circuit Court of appeals has ruled 2-1 against Democratic officials' request to block a lower court ruling that resulted in officials having to lower the number of signatures and extend the deadline to collect them for a ballot initiative to establish an independent redistricting commission. It's possible that the Supreme Court could block the district court's ruling if Oregon Democrats appeal, but they have yet to indicate whether they will do so.

Pennsylvania: The Pennsylvania Democratic Party has filed a lawsuit in state court seeking to effectively short-circuit a federal lawsuit that the Trump campaign and several GOP Congress members recently filed to restrict voting access, which the federal district court recently agreed to expedite.

Democrats are asking the appellate-level Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court to guarantee that counties can set up drop boxes for returning mail ballots; count ballots that are postmarked by Election Day and received within a few days afterward; give voters a chance to fix problems with mail ballot signatures; count mail ballots lacking an inner secrecy envelope; and prohibit voters from serving as poll watchers in a county where they aren't a resident. The GOP's federal lawsuit is trying to block drop boxes and allow out-of-county poll watchers, which is likely intended to facilitate voter intimidation.

Rhode Island: Voting rights groups have filed a lawsuit in federal court challenging Rhode Island's requirement that mail voters have their ballots signed by two witnesses or a notary, something that very few other states require. The plaintiffs argue that this requirement violates the Constitution during the pandemic, and they're asking the court to waive it for the Sept. 1 primary and November general election.

Tennessee: A federal district court judge has sided against civil right groups seeking to ease access to absentee voting ahead of the state's Aug. 6 primary, ruling that the plaintiffs waited too long to bring their challenge, but the court allowed the case to proceed for November. The plaintiffs wanted the court to require that voters be notified and given a chance to correct any problems with their mail ballots and also allow third-party groups to collect and submit absentee ballots on behalf of voters.

Texas: The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals has agreed with state Democrats' request to expedite consideration of the GOP's appeal of a lower court ruling that had ordered that all voters be allowed to vote absentee without needing an excuse instead of only voters aged 65 and up. The expedited timeline means there's a chance of a resolution in time for November.

Judge Orders Hunter Biden To Appear For Sworn Testimony

Hunter Biden got some very bad news this week when an Arkansas judge ordered him to appear in person next month to testify in a paternity lawsuit filed by his baby mama Lunden Alexis Roberts, a former stripper.

Circuit Judge Holly Meyer ordered Biden to appear in person for a deposition after he tried to argue that he would be unavailable to do so until April, according to the Arkansas Democrat Gazette. Meyer, however, was not having any of it.

“He needs to make himself available and unless his hair is on fire, he needs to be in Arkansas and he needs to be in a deposition,” she told the lawyers representing the two feuding parties on a recent phone call.

MORE NEWS: What if Biden drops out?

Biden initially denied that he was the father of Roberts’ child, but a paternity test then proved he was indeed the father back in January. The current legal battle is over child support, which Biden claims he can’t pay because he is unemployed.

Clint Lancaster, Roberts’ lawyer, had sought to depose Biden before March 13, but his lawyer Brent Langdon claimed that he would not be available until April 1. Meyer found this hard to believe, given the fact that Biden doesn’t have a job.

“My question to you is, why could your client not be available until after April 1? All the information I have is that he’s unemployed,” she said.

Langdon would not elaborate on what supposedly is keeping Biden so busy.

Democrats reportedly fear that Biden testifying could further damage his father Joe Biden’s presidential campaign, which is already struggling enough as it is, according to The Blaze. When he testifies in court, Biden could be forced to reveal all about his business dealings in Ukraine, which came under heavy scrutiny in the impeachment investigation of President Donald Trump.

MORE NEWS: Sanders won’t attend pro-Israeli forum, loathes Israel

Meyer had previously ordered Biden to appear in court in January, when it was alleged that he was improperly withholding financial records. She told him at the time to “show cause, if any exists, as to why he should not be held in contempt for any of the alleged violations of this Court’s orders.”

We’re glad to see that Meyer is forcing Biden to testify next month. The Biden family is as crooked as they come, and the American people deserve to know the truth about what they have really been up to all these years.

This piece originally appeared in LifeZette and is used by permission.

Read more at LifeZette:
Hollywood seemingly turns on Democrats after disastrous debate: ‘What a mess’
Police backtrack on initial Obama-era DHS whistleblower ‘suicide’ reports—FBI investigating his death
Hillary Clinton breaks her silence about her Harvey Weinstein connections after he’s convicted of rape charges

The post Judge Orders Hunter Biden To Appear For Sworn Testimony appeared first on The Political Insider.