​​Importantly, Reynolds did not include what is effectively a poll tax requirement in her order even though she signed a law earlier this year that would have required affected citizens to pay off any court-ordered restitution to victims before regaining their rights. That law would only have come into effect if Senate Republicans had followed their House brethren in passing the constitutional amendment discussed above, but even if both chambers had approved it, they would have needed to do so again and voters would have had to pass it in a 2022 referendum before it could become law.

While Iowa is no longer the only state to impose an automatic lifetime ban on voting for any felony conviction, it will remain one of the most restrictive states. A number of other states in recent years have moved to restore voting rights to everyone not currently incarcerated, and they've generally enshrined these restorations in state law; this order, by contrast, could always be rolled back by a future governor. However, Reynolds' order for now mitigates an injustice that has had a sharply disparate impact on Black voters: A 2016 Sentencing Project analysis estimated that 1 in every 10 African Americans was disenfranchised, five times the rate of everyone else.

2020 CENSUS

● 2020 Census: Confirming last week's bombshell report, the Census Bureau announced that it would conclude its counting efforts a month sooner than scheduled, ending its efforts to contact people who haven't yet filled out the census on Sept. 30 instead of Oct. 31. As we recently explained, rushing the end of counting efforts while the pandemic has only made the census more difficult risks creating a massive undercount of communities of color, a hallmark of Donald Trump's ongoing efforts to weaponize the census against Democratic and Latino representation in redistricting.

ELECTION SECURITY

● Georgia: A federal district court on Friday rejected a request to block the use of Georgia's new electronic voting machines, which experts have argued pose security vulnerabilities, and instead require hand-filled paper ballots. The judge noted that the plaintiffs had filed their motion before the pandemic prompted Republican Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger to postpone the March 24 primary to June 9 and therefore were unable to include evidence regarding the machines' use in an actual election.

However, the court did allow the plaintiffs to continue pressing their claims by buttressing their case with information from the June 9 election, which the plaintiffs have indicated they will do. Last week, the same judge largely rejected the GOP's motion to dismiss this case.

While the suit proceeds over the new voting machines, the plaintiffs have also filed a motion to require paper backups for the electronic poll books that are used to verify whether a voter at a particular polling place has voted already, citing widespread failures in the June primary as a major contributor to long voting lines.

REDISTRICTING

● Arkansas: Backers of an initiative to create an independent redistricting commission have announced that they have filed 50,000 more signatures to place their measure on the November ballot, on top of the 100,000 they had already submitted.

Last month, the Arkansas Supreme Court gave organizers a 30-day extension to collect more signatures while it reviews their appeal of GOP Secretary of State John Thurston's decision to reject all of their signatures as allegedly invalid. Thurston contends that signature-gatherers for this initiative, as well as a separate measure to adopt a form of instant-runoff voting, had not "passed" background checks even though the groups certified that they had "acquired" such checks.

If Thurston's decision is overturned, redistricting reformers should have a sufficient cushion to ensure that at least 89,000 of their signatures are valid statewide, as well as a number equivalent to 5% of the votes cast in the last gubernatorial election in at least 15 of Arkansas' 75 counties.

A federal appeals court had recently overturned a lower court ruling allowing supporters to gather signatures without them needing to be witnessed in-person, which would let voters sign petitions at home and mail them in. Plaintiffs have not indicated whether they would appeal that decision, but their effort to move ahead with traditional signature collection indicates they do not view it as a prohibitive obstacle.

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.

● California: Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom has signed a law allowing counties to consolidate polling places, particularly by adding larger sites that are better equipped for social distancing. In exchange, counties must offer more in-person early voting days, and if officials do consolidate voting sites, they must still maintain at least one polling place for every 10,000 registered voters, and they must be open for Election Day and the three days preceding it. Counties are furthermore required to set up one drop box for mail ballots for every 15,000 registered voters in the four weeks before Election Day.

California is mailing a ballot to every registered voter for the first time this November. However, in-person voting and mail ballot-return options that don't rely on the U.S. Postal Service are critical given both the difficulties mail voting poses for some voters as well as the Trump administration's efforts to sabotage postal delivery service by creating delays.

● Georgia: Georgia Democrats have filed a federal lawsuit seeking to prevent a repeat of the long voting lines that plagued the June primary by requiring a host of improvements, including: more polling places; emergency paper ballots in case Georgia's new electronic voting machines malfunction; paper backups of the voter registration rolls at polling places in case electronic poll books fail to work, as they did in in many cases in June; more training for poll workers; and more technicians to fix potential problems with voting equipment.

● Ohio: Ohio Democrats have filed a lawsuit in state court seeking to require officials to allow voters to apply for absentee mail ballots by fax or email instead of having to submit applications by mail. Republican Secretary of State Frank LaRose said that he thinks electronic applications are a good idea but claims that he lacks the authority to enable them without the approval of the Republican-run state legislature. LaRose is already planning to mail applications to all voters for this fall, but such a mailing will invariably fail to reach some voters.

● Pennsylvania: Voting rights advocates have filed a federal lawsuit seeking to require Pennsylvania to notify voters and give them a chance to fix problems with their mail ballots that could cause them to be rejected, such as a non-matching signature. Separately, Democrats are waging an ongoing lawsuit in state court seeking this change and several others to expand mail voting access.

● Virginia: Virginia's bipartisan state Board of Elections has unanimously agreed to add so-called "intelligent" barcodes to all mail ballot envelopes so that voters and election officials will be able to track them as they go through the mail system. Additionally, the board passed another rule saying that ballots received by noon on the third day after an election and have an illegible or missing postmark must nevertheless be counted, since the U.S. Postal Service is supposed to postmark ballots but hasn't always been doing so.

​​In their lame-duck session, Republicans passed legislation that removed key powers from both Evers and Kaul and transferred them to lawmakers. Most notably, Republicans took away Evers' ability to appoint members of several state boards and agencies. They also usurped Kaul's authority to decide whether to approve court settlements and whether the state should even defend lawsuits like those challenging voter suppression and gerrymandering. And they slashed early voting availability, although that move had been put on hold until the recent 7th Circuit ruling.

The Supreme Court upheld the laws stripping powers from Evers and Kaul, an unsurprising decision given the court's ruling last year that rejected a challenge to the legality of the entire lame-duck session itself. These decisions, along with one in April that blocked Evers from postponing elections that month to avoid exposing voters to coronavirus, cement the court's Republican-aligned majority as one of the most partisan in the nation—one that has willingly facilitated GOP legislators' attempt to reject the legitimacy of Democratic victories in 2018.

Meanwhile, in the voter ID case, the court revived a limit of two weeks for early voting, which had been allowed for as long as six weeks in some parts of the state. The judges also restored a requirement that voters maintain residency for at least 28 days to be able to vote at a given location, even if they've moved from elsewhere within the state. Voters with fewer than 28 days of residency would have to vote at their previous address.

In addition, the court barred the state from letting most voters receive an absentee ballot by fax or email so that they can print them out and return them by mail, even though military and overseas voters are permitted to do so. Multiple federal courts have also temporarily allowed blind voters in other states to obtain ballots this way due to the pandemic.

Most ominously, the judges, all of whom were appointed by Republicans, implied that any manipulation of election laws for partisan gain was constitutional even for laws that potentially discriminate against voters based on race. "If one party can make changes that it believes help its candidates, the other can restore the original rules or revise the new ones," they wrote, even though the very purpose of such laws is to make it impossible for the disadvantaged party to regain control.

This reasoning is the logical extension of the U.S. Supreme Court's 2019 decision prohibiting all federal challenges to partisan gerrymandering. If adopted by other courts, especially the Supreme Court, it would be open season for lawmakers to all but rig elections outright.

The ruling, however, was not a complete defeat for the plaintiffs. The 7th Circuit did uphold a decision letting college students use expired university IDs, as well as a prohibition on requiring schools to share citizenship information with the state. The judges gave the lower courts a chance to rewrite their now-invalidated injunctions to give voters who lack an ID the ability to easily get one, though that may be easier said than done especially because of the pandemic. The plaintiffs have not yet indicated whether they will appeal.

In a third recent case, the Wisconsin Supreme Court opted not to expedite an appeal by conservative activists who are trying to compel the state to purge roughly 129,000 voter registrations. The court won't hear the case at least until Sept. 29, when progressive Judge Jill Karofsky will have replaced conservative Justice Dan Kelly following her victory in April's election.

The timing matters because with Kelly still in office, conservatives would likely have had at least a 4-to-3 majority in favor of ordering the purge. However, once Karofsky takes her seat, conservative Justice Brian Hagedorn will most probably decide the fate of this lawsuit. Earlier this year, he sided with the progressive minority in declining to expedite the case, though it's unclear which way Hagedorn leans on the merits of the case. Even if the court permits the purge, such a decision may come too late to affect the November general election.

BALLOT MEASURES

● Arkansas: Redistricting reformers have submitted approximately 99,000 signatures to place an amendment on November's ballot to establish an independent redistricting commission. About 89,000 signatures must be found valid, including an amount equivalent to 5% of the votes cast in the last gubernatorial election in at least 15 of Arkansas' 75 counties.

Submitting only 10,000 more signatures than the minimum needed gives the initiative's backers less margin for error than is typically advised for such an effort, and even supporters estimate that only around 75,000 of their signatures are probably valid. However, Arkansas gives organizers one additional month to gather signatures if their initial submission includes valid signatures equivalent to 75% of the total needed both statewide and in at least 15 counties.

Supporters are waging an ongoing federal lawsuit seeking to suspend a requirement that initiative petition signatures be witnessed or notarized in-person. A lower court had temporarily blocked the requirement, allowing voters to sign petitions at home and mail them in, but the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals granted a short-term stay of that ruling last month while it decides whether to issue a lengthier stay while the GOP's appeal proceeds.

Separately, electoral reform supporters have submitted roughly 95,000 signatures for a different constitutional amendment that would establish a "top-four" primary. Under this system, all candidates regardless of party would compete on a single primary ballot, with the top four finishers advancing to a general election that would be decided by instant-runoff voting.

● Massachusetts: Supporters of a ballot initiative that would enact a statute implementing instant-runoff voting in congressional and state elections have submitted nearly double the 13,000 additional signatures needed to qualify for November's ballot. As a result, it's likely that voters will have a chance to decide whether to make Massachusetts the second state after Maine to adopt this reform for all state and federal races, aside from the presidency.

● North Dakota: Supporters of a ballot initiative that would amend North Dakota's constitution to reform redistricting and its electoral system have submitted some 37,000 signatures to qualify for the November ballot, 27,000 of which must be valid. Officials will determine by Aug. 10 whether the measure has qualified.

As we've previously detailed, this measure would replace traditional primaries with a "top-four" system where the four candidates with the most support would advance to the general election regardless of party. From there, instant-runoff voting would be used to determine the winner. Additionally, the measure would require that any voting machines create a paper record of every vote—North Dakota currently uses paper ballots by default and voting machines for voters with disabilities—and that the secretary of state conduct routine audits of elections.

The other major change would remove the Republican-dominated legislature's control over state legislative redistricting (North Dakota only has a single congressional district, which covers the entire state). The proposal would hand redistricting over to the state Ethics Commission, which voters created with a 2018 ballot initiative. The commission's five members are chosen by unanimous agreement of the governor and the majority and minority leaders of the state Senate; they would draw maps using several nonpartisan criteria.

● San Francisco, CA: The San Francisco Board of Supervisors has unanimously voted to put a referendum on the ballot this November that would amend the city's charter to lower the voting age to 16 in local elections.

Voters narrowly rejected a similar proposal 52-48 in a 2016 referendum, but if they pass the measure this time, San Francisco would become the first major city in the country to lower the voting age, though a few small localities in Maryland already allow 16-year-olds to vote in local elections.

Relatedly, all California voters will also get a chance to decide on another November referendum that would amend the state constitution to let 17-year-olds vote in primary elections for all levels of government if they will turn 18 by the time of the general election, a policy that a number of states already allow.

REDISTRICTING

● Michigan: A federal district court has dismissed a Republican-backed lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of Michigan's new independent redistricting commission that voters passed at the ballot box in 2018. This ruling follows a GOP loss in April before a panel of three judges on the GOP-heavy 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, which had unanimously upheld the lower court's refusal to temporarily block the law creating the commission while the case proceeded on the merits.

Republicans had been challenging the new commission in two lawsuits that were consolidated into a single set of proceedings. One lawsuit argued that the new commission violated Republicans' First Amendment rights to free speech and association and their 14th Amendment right to equal protection because it imposes prohibitions on who may serve as a commissioner.

Republicans argued in the other lawsuit that the process for selecting commissioners violates the GOP's First Amendment rights to freedom of association by preventing political parties from picking their own commissioners. The appeals court rejected both arguments by citing Supreme Court precedent enabling prohibitions on certain individuals serving on the commission, a decision the district court cited in its own ruling.

The Republican plaintiffs have not yet announced whether they will appeal but said they are considering their options.

● New Jersey: Democratic lawmakers in New Jersey have introduced a constitutional amendment that would delay the implementation of new legislative districts from 2021 until 2023 and keep the current districts in place if the Census Bureau is unable to deliver the data from the 2020 census needed to draw new districts on time next year. The Trump administration has already told Congress that it doesn't expect to be able to meet its early 2021 deadlines because of the pandemic and requested a new deadline of July 31. The proposed amendment would come into effect if the census doesn't certify New Jersey's data by Feb. 15.

Democrats hold the three-fifths supermajorities needed to put the amendment on the ballot without any GOP support, although voters would have to approve it in November for it to take effect. If no amendment passes, however, and the state is unable to meet its deadlines mandated under its constitution, it's unclear what exactly would happen except that litigation would be a certainty.

New Jersey has a bipartisan redistricting commission appointed by legislative and state party leaders, and in past decades, a court-appointed tiebreaker has chosen between maps proposed by the two parties rather than draw their own lines. After the 2010 census, the tiebreaking member selected the Democratic proposal, leading the GOP to blast this proposed amendment as a power grab, although common statistical measures find no unfair advantage for Democrats under the current map.

FELONY DISENFRANCHISEMENT

● District of Columbia: The D.C. Council has once again passed a bill to completely eliminate felony disenfranchisement as part of a larger package of police reforms, repealing and replacing the version it passed last month over what the lead sponsor called "relatively minor tweaks," sending the latest legislation to Mayor Muriel Bowser for her expected signature.

The bill would immediately restore voting rights for several thousand citizens and would require officials to provide incarcerated citizens with registration forms and absentee ballots starting next year. However, because it is emergency legislation, it must be reauthorized after 90 days, though Council members plan to make it permanent soon.

Once Bowser signs the bill, D.C. would become only the third jurisdiction in the country after Maine and Vermont to maintain the right to vote for incarcerated citizens. It would also be 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.

● Florida: Voting rights advocates have asked the Supreme Court to overturn a recent stay by the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals of a lower court ruling that had struck down the Florida GOP's poll tax on citizens who have served their felony sentences but owe court fines or fees. If it's put back into effect, the district court's ruling would pave the way for approximately 800,000 citizens who couldn't pay off Florida's predatory court costs to regain their voting rights, a group of citizens that is disproportionately Black.

Separately, the 11th Circuit scheduled a hearing on the merits of the case for Aug. 18, the very same day as Florida's statewide primary and nearly a month after the July 20 voter registration deadline for that election, ensuring that affected voters will be unable to vote in that election if the Supreme Court doesn't intervene.

BALLOT ACCESS

● Minnesota: Minnesota officials have announced that they will not appeal a federal district court ruling from June that issued a preliminary injunction blocking a state law that would have listed Democrats last on the ballot in every partisan contest statewide in November after national Democrats sued. The court said that ballot order will be determined randomly for 2020, though the state's agreement with plaintiffs would give lawmakers a chance to change the law legislatively next year before the case proceeds further. As we've previously explained, being listed higher on the ballot can give candidates a modest boost, particularly in less-salient downballot races.

VOTER SUPPRESSION

● Indiana: Voting rights advocates have filed a federal lawsuit that challenges the constitutionality of a law that Republicans passed in 2019 to prohibit voters, parties, and candidates from asking a court to keep polling locations open past 6 PM local time on Election Day if there are problems with voting. Under current law, only bipartisan county election boards can ask a court to extend polling hours, and only after a unanimous vote.

The plaintiffs argue that this law violates the First and 14th Amendments and has a disparate impact on Black and Latino voters. Alongside Kentucky, Indiana is the only state that closes its polls at 6 PM on Election Day (all others close 7 PM or later), and this early closure makes it difficult to vote for people who work on Election Day or are caregivers for children or family members.

● Iowa: Republican Gov. Kim Reynolds has signed a budget bill into law that makes Iowa's voter ID regime more onerous and makes absentee voting more cumbersome for election officials to facilitate despite an expected surge in mail voting due to the pandemic.

The law adds a new requirement that voters present ID if they go to their county government offices to vote early in-person. A second provision requires absentee ballot applications to include the voter's "voter ID PIN," a state-issued four-digit number that few voters are likely aware of.

In addition, under the state's previous laws, county officials could verify voter identities using other information on their applications or the state's registration database, but this new law disallows that. Instead, officials would have to contact the voter individually to confirm their identity, which could cause significant delays in processing absentee requests and lead to voters not receiving their ballots in time to vote by mail.

● Montana: A state court has issued a preliminary injunction blocking a GOP-supported law that makes it a crime for most Montanans to turn in another person's absentee mail ballot, ruling in favor of the Native American advocates who brought a suit arguing that the statute violates the state constitution. The court had previously blocked the law on a short-term basis days before the June 2 primary, but this latest ruling suspends the law until the judge can issue a final ruling on the law, which may not happen until after November's elections.

The law in question was approved by voters in 2018 after Republican legislators placed it on the ballot to circumvent a veto from Democratic Gov. Steve Bullock. It makes it a felony to turn in someone else's absentee ballot unless the person doing so is the voter's family member, caregiver, household member, or acquaintance, and even those individuals may turn in no more than six others' absentee ballots. Only postal workers and election officials are fully exempt.

Montana is one of a few states that lets voters opt into permanently receiving an absentee mail ballot in all elections, which is intended to make it easier to vote. In addition, the pandemic prompted officials to mail every voter a ballot for the June 2 primary, and mail voting is likely to be very popular in November. However, because many Native Americans living on remote reservations lack reliable postal service and access to transportation, many ask others who do not face such barriers to turn in their ballots for them.

Republican state Attorney General Tim Fox and Secretary of State Corey Stapleton have not yet indicated whether they will appeal, though the lead GOP sponsor of the law said he hoped that they would.

ELECTORAL COLLEGE

● Electoral College: On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected two legal challenges to the constitutionality of state laws prohibiting "faithless electors" in the Electoral College, ruling that states may enforce their laws that require the replacement of electors attempting to vote for a candidate other than the one whose slate they appeared on. Faithless elector bans are the law in 32 states and the District of Columbia, but only 15 states have provisions that actually enforce those bans by requiring faithless electors to be replaced with faithful ones.

The 10th Circuit Court of Appeals struck down Colorado's ban on faithless electors last year, but Washington's Supreme Court upheld its state's ban. The losers in both lawsuits had appealed to the Supreme Court, which ultimately upheld Washington's ruling and overturned the case out of Colorado.

Supporters of overturning faithless elector bans brought their cases in the hopes that victory would undermine public support for the Electoral College and lead to reforms abolishing it. However, justices such as Samuel Alito and Brett Kavanaugh raised concern that doing so would "lead to chaos" and a "massive campaign to try to influence electors" in a close election, which could open the door to corruption, blackmail, and potentially the disenfranchisement of voters.

Although the cases did not address the ongoing effort to reform the Electoral College by having states with a majority of electoral votes to pledge their electoral votes to the national popular vote winner, it may nevertheless neutralize one of the several potential legal threats to this project, known as National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. That's because the court validated the notion that the Constitution grants the states sweeping authority to determine how they award their electors, although other potential constitutional challenges remain if the compact attains enough member states to enter into effect.

ELECTIONS

● Mississippi: This fall, Mississippi voters will have their chance to repeal a provision of the state's Jim Crow-era constitution that deliberately penalizes Black voters and the Democrats they support in elections for statewide office. However, the proposed change could end up replacing one major hurdle for Democratic candidates with another.

Last week, Republican Gov. Tate Reeves signed a bill placing a constitutional amendment on the November ballot that would change the way the state conducts elections by eliminating Mississippi's version of the Electoral College, a key feature of the state's 1890 constitution that proponents openly announced was enacted "to secure to the State of Mississippi 'white supremacy.'"

The provision in question requires candidates for statewide offices such as governor or attorney general to win not only a majority of the vote but also a majority of the state House's 122 districts. If no candidate surpasses both thresholds, the members of the House choose the winner, and there's nothing to stop them from picking the person who lost the popular vote.

After Republicans took control of the legislature in 2011, they redrew their own districts to guarantee they'd never lose their grip on power. They did so by making sure a majority of districts would be heavily white and, therefore, heavily Republican. As a result, they not only gerrymandered the state House, they gerrymandered every statewide election, too. The effect was so pronounced that in last year's race for governor, which Democrat Jim Hood lost by 52-47, Hood would likely have had to win by 15 points just to have a shot at carrying 62 House districts.

This proposed amendment would no longer require candidates for statewide office to carry a majority of the state House districts, but it would mandate a separate general election runoff if no candidate earned a majority of the vote. Georgia has had a similar runoff law on the books for years, and those runoffs have consistently seen turnout plummet and hurt Democratic candidates. If Mississippi Republicans wanted to ensure candidates are elected with majority support, they could instead replace the current system with instant-runoff voting or another preferential voting system that would eliminate the need for a separate runoff election.

Even if this amendment fails to pass, it may not be the last word. Last year, a group of Black voters challenged this mini-Electoral College in federal court on the grounds that it violated the Constitution's guarantee of one person, one vote. While the judge who heard the case agreed, he put the suit on hold to give lawmakers time to correct the problem themselves. If they fail to, the judge said, he'd allow litigants to once more pursue their claims.

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.

● Colorado: The Colorado Supreme Court, which has a 6-1 majority of Democratic appointees, has unanimously overturned Democratic Gov. Jared Polis' executive order that had allowed ballot initiative supporters to gather voter signatures by mail or email, siding with the business groups that brought the case and reinstating a requirement that signatures be witnessed in-person. This ruling may make it impossible for some measures to qualify for the ballot ahead of the Aug. 3 deadline to submit signatures.

● Michigan: The 6th Circuit Court of Appeals has refused to stay a district court ruling that required Michigan to either lower the number of signatures needed to put initiatives on November's ballot or give supporters more time to gather them. The state has not yet indicated whether they will appeal the stay while the case proceeds on the merits.

● New Hampshire: Advocates for blind voters have filed a federal lawsuit arguing that New Hampshire makes it impossible for them to exercise their right to vote a secret ballot using an absentee ballot. They want the court to require that New Hampshire let voters with such disabilities use the same absentee voting system available to military and overseas voters, which allows voters to fill out their ballots using a computer and print them out to mail them in.

● New York: Civil rights advocates have filed a federal lawsuit objecting to New York's procedures for rejecting absentee ballots. They aim to avoid a repeat of 2018, when New York had the highest rate of rejected mail ballots in the country, with 14% of such ballots invalidated. The plaintiffs are challenging how ballots with problems such as a signature either missing or not matching the one on file are rejected without notifying voters. They want the state to require that voters be alerted and given a chance to remedy the problem in a timely manner.

● North Carolina: Voters who are suing North Carolina in state court to make it easier to vote absentee have amended their lawsuit to include a request for 21 extra days of in-person early voting. The case remains pending before a lower court.

Separately, the ACLU has filed a new lawsuit in state court to suspend the requirement that absentee voters have someone witness their ballot in-person. The GOP legislature with the support of Democrats passed a law earlier this year to require only one witness instead of two witnesses or a notary. However, even one required witness is more than most states mandate and has been waived by courts this year in other states with such requirements on their books.

● Oregon: Redistricting reformers announced on Wednesday that they had failed to obtain enough signatures by the July 2 deadline to put an initiative on the November ballot that would establish an independent redistricting commission. However, their campaign isn't over just yet thanks to a lawsuit that organizers filed in federal court shortly ahead of the deadline. The plaintiffs are asking the court to lower the number of signatures needed, which is currently about 150,000, and for an extension of the deadline to submit them.

Reformers did not reveal how many signatures they had already submitted to the state, only saying it was in the "tens of thousands." It's unclear whether they will be able to meet the requirements if only one or the other of their two requests are granted and not both, since they lack the ability to obtain signatures electronically and instead have to direct supporters to an online form that must be printed out and mailed in to officials.

● Pennsylvania: The Trump campaign and several Republican Congress members have filed a lawsuit in federal court seeking to prohibit counties from setting up drop boxes or locations aside from the county board office for voters to return their absentee mail ballots. They also want to bar officials from counting mail ballots that aren't placed in a secrecy envelope and allow Pennsylvanians to serve as poll watchers across the state regardless of which county they live in.

These provisions would add onerous burdens for mail voting access, and the measure on poll watchers in particular appears intended to encourage voter intimidation in urban communities of color in cities like Philadelphia. At one 2016 campaign rally, Trump listed several cities with large Black populations—including Philadelphia—and urged his supporters to volunteer as poll watchers in them.

● Puerto Rico: Governor Wanda Vázquez of the pro-statehood New Progressive Party (known by its Spanish acronym, PNP) signed a bill into law making changes to Puerto Rico's election code late last month only after lawmakers removed a contentious provision that would have enabled online voting for absentee voters this year and set the island on a path to transition entirely to universal online voting by 2028. Lawmakers removed the provision after election security experts expressed alarm at the major risk of hacking with such a system.

Vázquez's party passed the final bill over the objections of the pro-commonwealth Popular Democratic Party, or PPD, which is the island's other major party. The bill expanded early voting and eligibility for mail voting, but the PPD denounced it as a power grab. Opposition lawmakers claimed it would allow Puerto Ricans who've left the island for the mainland to vote absentee in an effort to bolster the PNP's support, which has been hurt by scandals that culminated in Vázquez's predecessor resigning last year.

● South Carolina: South Carolina's state Election Commission has announced that it will provide prepaid postage on all absentee ballots this year amid an ongoing federal lawsuit by Democrats seeking to ease access to absentee voting. Democrats are still challenging the requirement that voters must provide a valid excuse, which the GOP waived for the primaries but has left untouched for November.

● Tennessee: Republican officials announced that they plan to enforce parts of a 2019 law restricting absentee voting eligibility despite a recent state court ruling that allows all voters to cast an absentee ballot due to concerns over COVID-19. The law requires that newly registered voters who registered by mail, a voter registration drive, or public assistance offices must vote in-person the first time. Black voters in particular have been more likely to register through registration drives in recent years, exposing them to a disproportionate impact.

Republicans passed this restriction in 2019 in reaction to a 2018 surge in Black voter registrations. The law added criminal penalties to certain components of voter registration drives in an effort intended to make them all but impossible to conduct. While the GOP subsequently repealed some of those provisions regarding registration drives after a court ruling had curtailed them, other provisions of the law remain in effect, such as one that makes it a crime to pay workers based on the number of registrations they gather instead of paying them hourly or allowing them to volunteer.

However, the GOP's decision to enforce this in-person voting requirement for these registrants is not the final word, as the plaintiffs in the case that loosened the absentee voting restrictions are challenging this mandate as well. Republicans are currently appealing that ruling to the state Supreme Court, although the high court refused to stay the lower court's decision while the appeal proceeds.

WASHINGTON, D.C. STATEHOOD

● District of Columbia: On Tuesday, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer announced that the full U.S. House will vote on granting statehood to Washington, D.C. on June 26. With a majority of House members already in support, Washington, D.C.’s statehood is expected to soon pass a chamber of Congress for the first time in U.S. history.

While Senate Republicans have vowed to block statehood for Washington, D.C. so long as they control the chamber, Senate Democrats are increasingly unified in support. In the weeks following George Floyd’s death at the hands of the Minneapolis police that sparked the wave of protests nationally, four Democrats—Michigan’s Debbie Stabenow and Gary Peters, Montana's Jon Tester, and Nevada’s Jacky Rosen—have all signed on as co-sponsors. As shown on this map, these new additions mean that 40 senators have now signed on, while just seven Democratic holdouts remain.

If Democrats win back the Senate in November, statehood supporters come within striking distance of a majority, especially since Democratic candidates who’ve come out in support of statehood—such as Montana’s Gov. Steve Bullock—could flip Republican-held seats. If Democrats eliminate the filibuster, it would only take a simple majority vote to admit Washington, D.C. as a state, and if statehood-supporter Joe Biden wins the White House and his vice president breaks a tie in favor, statehood would only need 10 more Senate votes to pass.

BALLOT MEASURES

● Maine: Republicans have submitted 72,000 signatures in their attempt to put a veto referendum on the ballot to block a law that extends instant-runoff voting to presidential elections (it would remain in use for Congress in November regardless). If approximately 63,000 of these signatures are determined valid within the next 30 days, instant-runoff voting will be automatically suspended for November's presidential election regardless of whether voters opt to keep the law at the ballot box this fall.

However, Republicans may yet fail in their quest to prevent instant-runoff voting from being used this year depending on the outcome of a lawsuit that instant-runoff supporters filed in state court earlier this spring. That lawsuit argues that it's too late for Republicans to use the veto referendum process instead of attempting to repeal the statute through a regular ballot initiative, the latter of which wouldn't suspend the law for November even if it qualified for the ballot.

● Massachusetts: Supporters of instant-runoff voting have submitted 25,000 additional signatures to qualify for November's ballot. In the likely event that at least 13,000 of them are valid, voters would get a chance to weigh in on whether to adopt instant-runoff voting for congressional and state offices, which would make Massachusetts the second state to adopt this electoral reform after Maine voters passed it through a 2016 ballot initiative.

● San Francisco, CA: San Francisco's Board of Supervisors has unanimously passed an amendment to the city's charter out of committee that would lower the voting age in city elections to 16. A majority of board members have already signaled their support, and once it clears a vote by the full board, it would appear on the November ballot. San Francisco voters narrowly rejected a similar proposal in 2016 by a 52-48 margin.

ELECTION SECURITY

● Delaware: Delaware officials have decided to abandon the use of an online voting system for absentee voters that the state had implemented for its July 7 presidential primary. Delaware had adopted the system in part to make it easier for disabled voters who can't easily vote by mail to be able to cast their ballots while maintaining their right to secrecy, but officials reversed course in the face of widespread opposition by computer security experts, who have broadly warned that no internet-based voting system is secure.

Although online voting is still novel in the U.S., interest has grown in the idea in recent years, and West Virginia implemented it for military and overseas voters in 2018. Subsequently, other states have begun considering such a system for voters with disabilities. However, Delaware is just the latest in a list of jurisdictions—including West Virginia—that have had second thoughts this year after hearing from security experts.

FELONY DISENFRANCHISEMENT

● Florida: The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals has agreed to expedite Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis' appeal of last month's district court ruling that struck down the GOP's poll tax on people who have served their felony sentences but owe court fines or fees, with oral arguments scheduled to begin the week of Aug. 10. DeSantis also asked the 11th Circuit, which now has a majority of GOP appointees, to hear the appeal "en banc" where all judges on the circuit participate, but the court has not addressed that request yet.

● Iowa: Republican Gov. Kim Reynolds promised this week to issue an executive order ending lifetime felony disenfranchisement in Iowa for people who have served their sentences after the Republican-run state Senate refused to pass a constitutional amendment to restore voting rights before they adjourned this month. Reynolds, however, declined to outline the specifics of what her order will entail, and given her track record on this issue, it's uncertain how extensive such an order might be, or even when it might be issued.

Reynolds and the state legislature passed a modern-day poll tax earlier this month, which Senate Republicans had sought as a precondition before they'd approve the rights restoration amendment. But even though the poll tax became law, the Senate didn't follow through on passing the amendment.

The poll tax, at least, will not take effect because it was contingent on the amendment itself becoming law, but it would have placed serious burdens on those seeking to have their voting rights restored. In particular, it would have maintained the ban on voting for people who have served their sentences but owe court-ordered restitution to victims. It also would have preserved the lifetime ban for those convicted of the most serious offenses, who would have still required the governor's individual approval to vote again.

The Iowa GOP's poor track record on the issue goes back years. Iowa's last two Democratic governors, Tom Vilsack and Chet Edwards, had both used executive orders to automatically restore voting rights upon the completion of sentences, but former Republican Gov. Terry Branstad rescinded that order upon taking office in 2011. After succeeding Branstad in 2017, Reynolds refused to issue her own order restoring voting rights despite pressure from activists and obstinacy from the Senate that made a legislative fix impossible to pass.

ELECTION CHANGES

● Nebraska: Due to their inability to gather voter signatures as a result of the coronavirus pandemic, redistricting reformers have reportedly given up on trying to put a constitutional amendment on the Nebraska ballot this November to create a bipartisan redistricting commission. The amendment would have created a nine-member commission of three Democrats, three Republicans, and three unaffiliated members chosen by legislators. Commissioners would have been tasked with drawing congressional and legislative districts using several nonpartisan criteria.

The failure to reform the redistricting process ensures that Republican legislators will have a large say in the process next year just as they did after 2010. However, it is unclear if Republicans will be able to gerrymander the lines once again because Nebraska has a strong legislative filibuster that would take a two-thirds supermajority to overcome. Republicans were able to surpass that threshold after 2010 but currently couldn't attain without Democratic votes.

Republicans could change the rules to curtail the filibuster with a simple majority and thus be assured of having full control over redistricting. However, given that they have not done so in recent years despite Democratic filibusters that have repeatedly defeated proposals like voter ID, it's unclear if the GOP will be able to muster the votes to change the rules next year.

● New Jersey: Democratic officials in New Jersey have agreed to settle a federal lawsuit over the state's signature-matching process for mail ballots. The settlement will have the state agree not to reject ballots for problems with a voter's signature either missing or not matching the one on file without notifying the voter and giving them a chance to correct the problem.

Giving voters the opportunity to fix signature problems took on heightened importance after local elections in a number of municipalities in May saw nearly 10% of ballots statewide rejected and not counted—a far higher rate than is typical—with the most common reasons involving signature problems. That election was the first in which the state chose to mail every voter a ballot, something New Jersey plans to do again for its July 7 primary.

● North Dakota: A federal district court has declined to allow supporters of a ballot initiative to reform elections to gather voter signatures electronically. With the July 6 deadline to submit signatures fast approaching, this ruling could defeat the ballot effort if it isn't overturned.

The initiative in question would amend North Dakota's constitution to transfer control over redistricting from the Republican-dominated legislature to the state's bipartisan Ethics Commission. It would also replace the existing electoral system with a primary where the top four finishers would advance to an instant-runoff general election.

● Ohio: Supporters of a ballot initiative to expand voting access have announced they're calling it quits for 2020 after a 6th Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that blocked initiative supporters from gathering signatures electronically to make it onto November's ballot. Although backers of a separate marijuana decriminalization effort are appealing to the Supreme Court in an effort to be able to gather signatures electronically, their odds of success appear low, and voting reformers aren't joining the appeal.

The voting access measure would have enacted automatic voter registration, same-day voter registration, a guaranteed number of early voting days, a ban on tightening Ohio's voter ID law to exclude non-photo IDs, and a requirement to carry out routine audits of election results. Its failure makes Ohio the third of three states, after Missouri and Arizona, where the pandemic has prevented those planning a major expansion of voting access from gathering the necessary signatures to appear on the ballot.

​The USPS has been barred from being subsidized with taxpayer funds since the 1980s and instead must remain profitable on its own. Republicans also passed a law in 2006 that requires the agency to prefund its retiree health benefits 75 years into the future, costing the agency more than $5 billion a year. While prefunding benefits is by no means a bad idea on its own, no other federal agency—let alone the postal service's private competitors—operates under anything like that requirement, putting the postal service at a huge disadvantage.

If the postal service faced a more level playing field among its competitors when it came to pension obligations, its services would likely be more competitive and able to earn more revenue—and therefore it would not be facing its current shortfall. As well, letting this essential service rely on taxpayer subsidies at least in emergency situations would eliminate the potential for a crisis like this one entirely.

Congressional Democrats had proposed giving the postal service a $25 billion infusion and forgiving its $11 billion in debt to avoid a cataclysmic shutdown, but Senate Republicans stripped it out of the recently passed $2 trillion stimulus bill. Instead, the GOP supported a provision to let the agency borrow $10 billion from the Treasury Department instead of its yearly maximum of $3 billion. However, such a loan could only be used for operating expenses and not paying off debt, leading the agency to warn that the proposal didn't go nearly far enough.

It's critical that Congress passes a law to mandate and fund an expansion of mail voting in the states to ensure that tens of millions of voters aren't denied the ability to safely vote, and some states at least are already taking steps to do so on their own. However, in the worst-casescenario, where the postal service must cut or cease operations, states relying on mail voting would wind up in an impossible situation.

House Democrats were in a position of maximum leverage prior to the passage of the last stimulus bill, but they caved to Republicans when they agreed to a package that didn't include adequate election protection measures or direct postal service funding. However, they may still have a chance if further stimulus efforts take shape, though any hopes rest on whether Republicans recognize that their November election odds depend heavily on the state of the economy.

ELECTION CHANGES

The following states have recently moved their elections for various positions:

New York: from April 28 to June 23 primaries (presidential primary and 27th Congressional District special general election)

Puerto Rico: from April 26 to an undetermined future date (presidential primary)

South Dakota: from April 14 through May 26 to any Tuesday in June (optional; local only)

West Virginia: from May 12 to June 9 (presidential and downballot primaries)

You can stay on top of all changes to statewide primary dates by bookmarking our 2020 calendar.

● Arizona: Supporters of six ballot initiatives have filed a lawsuit asking Arizona's conservative-majority Supreme Court to temporarily allow the electronic gathering of petition signatures needed to put these measures on the ballot ahead of the state's July 2 deadline. They argue that the ongoing coronavirus pandemic has made it all but impossible to responsibly and safely continue gathering signatures in-person. They say that the state could readily expand online gathering instead by using the existing online system that candidates for elected office already use.

Supporters of two other initiative efforts, including one to expand voting access and implement other election reforms, have filed a similar lawsuit in federal court. The proposed voting rights measure would establish automatic voter registration through the state's Motor Vehicle Division, same-day voter registration, and in-person polling places on Native American tribal lands. It would also expand early voting, allow audits of election results, impose ethics and lobbying restrictions, lower the private campaign contribution limits, and significantly expand Arizona's existing public financing system.

Arizona is by no means the only state dealing with the pandemic's fallout for pro-democracy ballot initiatives. The crisis is complicating efforts to put similar voting access expansions on the November ballot in Missouri and Ohio.

● Alabama: Republican Gov. Kay Ivey says she opposes legislation that would remove Alabama's excuse requirement for voting absentee. Ivey said that such a move "raises the potential for voter fraud," though her office did not respond to follow-up questions as to why she thinks so. Almost three dozen states allow voters to cast ballots by mail without an excuse and none have reported any non-trivial problems with fraud as a result.

Republican Secretary of State John Merrill previously relaxed the state's excuse requirement, allowing any voter to request an absentee ballot for the state's July 14 primary runoffs by checking a box labeled "I have a physical illness or infirmity which prevents my attendance at the polls" on their ballot applications. Ivey says she plans to avail herself of this option. In a recent interview, Merrill said that only "liberal extremists" are interested in expanding mail voting even though he supported a bill to eliminate the excuse requirement in 2017.

● Arizona: Arizona's Republican-run legislature went into recess last week without considering a proposal by Democratic Secretary of State Katie Hobbs to allow the state to conduct its Aug. 4 downballot primaries or the November general election by mail. Lawmakers are set to reconvene on April 13.

● Arkansas: A federal judge has rejected a lawsuit that sought to extend the deadline by which absentee ballots cast in Arkansas' March 31 primary runoffs had to be received in order to count. Under Arkansas law, absentee ballots must be received by Election Day. The suit, backed by the NAACP, had asked that officials accept any ballots they receive within at least 10 days of the election, so long as they were postmarked by Election Day. The judge said that plaintiffs had lacked standing and left the current deadline in place.

● District of Columbia: Officials in Washington, D.C. have said that the city will significantly cut back on in-person voting in the June 2 primary, dropping from 144 polling places to just 20. Instead, officials are encouraging voters to cast an absentee mail ballot, which does not require an excuse.

● Georgia: State House Speaker David Ralston has finally acknowledged why he's repeatedly asked Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger to delay Georgia's May 19 presidential and downballot primaries: He doesn't want more Democrats to vote. In a new interview, Ralston said that Raffensperger's plan to mail absentee ballot applications to every active registered voter in the state would be "extremely devastating to Republicans and conservatives in Georgia" because it would "certainly drive up turnout."

Those remarks echo recent comments by Donald Trump, who said that proposals by congressional Democrats to safeguard elections would lead to "levels of voting that if you ever agreed to it you’d never have a Republican elected in this country again." Ralston has been hoping that a later primary would derail Raffensperger's ballot application efforts by allowing the state to rely chiefly on in-person voting. However, Raffensperger and Gov. Brian Kemp, both Republicans, say they lack the power to postpone the election a second time (previously, Raffensperger delayed the March 24 presidential primary until May).

Ralston could of course pass legislation changing the date and manner of the election, and Republican leaders even have the power to reconvene the legislature for a special session. However, Ralston sent members of the House home several weeks ago and suspended the legislature's current session indefinitely.

● Hawaii: Hawaii election officials will mail every voter a postage-prepaid card to update their signature for voting by mail to help ensure that votes aren't rejected because the signature on their ballot envelopes supposedly doesn't match the one on file. Separately, Hawaii Democrats have announced that they will count any mail-in ballots cast in their presidential primary that they receive by May 22 and will announce results on May 23. Previously, the party had canceled all in-person voting, which had been set for April 4.

● Idaho: Republican Secretary of State Lawerence Denney says he will send absentee ballot applications to every registered voter ahead of Idaho's May 19 downballot primaries. Earlier in the week, Republican Gov. Brad Little said the primary would be conducted by mail but at the time did not announce any plans to make mail ballots more accessible. Little had also rejected Denney's proposal to postpone the primary to June 16 or later.

It's also unclear whether the state will provide any in-person voting options for the many voters who are not able to participate by mail. Without such options, Idaho could leave itself vulnerable to a lawsuit.

● Illinois: Leaders of both chambers of Illinois' Democratic-run legislature say they are supportive of conducting the November general election by mail as the default voting method, an idea recently floated by Democratic Gov. J.B. Pritzker. Democratic state Sen. Julie Morrison says she plans to introduce legislation when lawmakers reconvene later this month that would send each voter an absentee ballot.

● Iowa: Republican Secretary of State Paul Pate says he will mail an absentee ballot application, with a postage-paid return envelope, to all 2 million active registered voters in Iowa ahead of the state's June 2 downballot primaries. However, this effort will miss any voters marked as "inactive" on the rolls. Registrations typically get marked as such when mail to these voters is returned as undelivered, but such voters still possess valid registrations and a portion of them wind up voting, typically in person.

● Kansas: Kansas Democrats have canceled all in-person voting for their May 2 presidential primary. The party had previously said it would send mail ballots with postage-paid return envelopes to all registered Democrats in the state. Anyone who does not receive a ballot can, starting on April 10, request one online through April 24. Ballots must be received by May 2 in order to count.

● Kentucky: Kentucky's Republican-run legislature has passed a bill that would allow the secretary of state and governor to jointly change the "manner" in which an election that takes place during a state of emergency can be held (under current law, only the "time" and "place" may be altered). Republican Secretary of State Michael Adams says the measure would give him added "flexibility," though he was vague on details, saying he'd like to prepare for an election with "limited in-person voting and expanded voting by mail."

Since Kentucky requires an excuse to cast an absentee ballot, any expansion to mail voting would likely have to involve a relaxation or waiver of that requirement. Adams did specify that he had "ruled out any move to a universal vote-by-mail system." It's not clear whether Democratic Gov. Andy Beshear will sign the legislation, a large bill mostly devoted to revenues that contains at least one provision Beshear previously vetoed as a stand-alone measure. However, Republicans could override a Beshear veto with a simple majority.

● Maryland: Maryland's Board of Elections reversed itself on Thursday and recommended to Gov. Larry Hogan that each of the state's 24 counties provide at least one in-person voting location for the June 2 presidential and downballot primaries. Hogan must now decide whether to approve the board's recommendations. An earlier version of the board's plan to mail ballots to all voters would have eliminated in-person polling sites altogether, which would have risked disenfranchising many groups of voters, including those:

• with certain disabilities, particularly the visually impaired;
• without housing;
• with language barriers;
• who should have received a ballot but do not;
• who are displaced due to the pandemic;
• who currently can't obtain a state ID necessary to register to vote because the DMV is closed; and
• who are simply difficult to reach by mail.

Of that last group, known as "inactive" voters because mail sent to them is undeliverable, the board's counsel says that up to 4% wind up participating in a typical election. The ACLU and advocates for the blind had expressed serious concerns about the board's plans, which likely spurred them to reverse course.

● Massachusetts: Republican Gov. Charlie Baker has signed a bill that gives towns the ability to reschedule any local election that was set to take place by May 30 to as late as June 30. The measure also allows all voters to request an absentee mail ballot in elections held before July. The bill does not apply to the state's Sept. 1 downballot primaries, however.

● Missouri: An organization representing county clerks in Missouri has asked the state's Republican-run legislature to let any voter cast an absentee ballot in an emergency like the present one. The clerks also want to allow voters to request absentee ballots online. Lawmakers are tentatively set to return next week for a two-day session but their top priority will be passing a budget.

● New Mexico: The New Mexico Supreme Court has set arguments for April 14 in a case brought by 27 of the state's 33 county clerks, who have asked that the state's June 2 presidential and downballot primaries be conducted by mail. In their request, the clerks specify that some in-person voting locations would remain in operation to assist those unable to vote by mail. Democratic Secretary of State Maggie Toulouse Oliver, who is named as the defendant is the clerks' suit, recently said that "an all-mail election is not likely."

Republicans filed a lawsuit to oppose the request and say that the matter should be handled by the legislature, which they say could be called in for a special session. Democrats, however, oppose the idea of a special session, fearing that convening lawmakers and their staff could exacerbate the spread of the coronavirus. The justices have specifically asked the parties and Democratic Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham to opine on whether the legislature can meet electronically.

● New York: A handful of Democratic lawmakers are renewing their efforts to pass a bill to expand online voter registration in New York City, which currently only covers voters with a DMV-issued ID and is therefore unavailable for a large number of voters given the high proportion of city residents who do not drive. The heavily Democratic City Council passed a law to do just that in 2017, but the state Board of Elections stymied the council by adding additional barriers.

● North Carolina: Phil Berger, the Republican leader of North Carolina's state Senate, has rejected ideas put forth by the state's Board of Elections to make mail voting easier and to make Election Day a holiday. Meanwhile, the board has partnered with the state's DMV and will now, for the first time, allow voters with state IDs to register to vote online. Nine states representing 1 in 7 Americans still do not allow online registration along the lines that North Carolina now will.

● Ohio: On Friday, a federal district court rejected a lawsuit that had been brought earlier in the week by civil rights groups seeking an order that Ohio officials delay the state's April 28 primaries and mail ballots (with postage-paid return envelopes) to every voter who has not yet voted.

Under a new law recently signed by Republican Gov. Mike DeWine, the state will eliminate almost all in-person voting. Instead, it will send postcards to voters explaining how to request an absentee ballot application. Voters would then have to print out applications on their own, or request one be mailed to them, and then mail them in. (Applications cannot be submitted online, but GOP Secretary of State Frank LaRose said voters who lack a printer could make a hand-written request so long as they provide the necessary information.) They would then have to mail in their absentee ballots.

The voting rights advocates who brought this suit had argued that there isn't enough time to complete this multi-step process before April 28 and wanted the court to pick a new date. Plaintiffs also said the state's voter registration period, which ended on Feb. 18, must be immediately re-opened until 30 days before voting concludes in order to comply with federal law, but the judge denied their motion for a temporary restraining order.

● South Carolina: South Carolina's Election Commission has made a number of recommendations to Republican Gov. Henry McMaster and the GOP-run legislature to ensure the state's elections can run properly despite the threat of the coronavirus. Those suggestions include:

• Removing the excuse requirement to vote absentee
• Allowing voters to request absentee ballots online
• Removing the requirement to have witnesses sign absentee ballots
• Moving to a vote-by-mail system in which every voter would be sent a ballot
• Allowing early voting for the first time

Lawmakers would have to pass a bill to enact these changes, or to postpone the state's June 9 downballot primaries. However, McMaster said he would defer to the legislature, which recently adjourned without taking any action on elections and will meet for just one day next week to address budgetary matters. The legislature may reconvene at a later date.

● Texas: Texas' secretary of state's office has taken a small step toward expanding access to mail voting by advising county election officials that voters may request an absentee ballot if they have any condition that precludes them from voting in-person "without a likelihood of needing personal assistance or of injuring the voter's health." If officials are lenient, that provision of law could allow voters concerned about the coronavirus to obtain absentee ballots. Texas Democrats filed a lawsuit last month asking that all voters be allowed to vote absentee for this reason.

The office's new letter, from Director of Elections Keith Ingram, also suggests that county officials seek court orders to allow expanded mail voting options for "those affected by quarantines." However, as the Houston Chronicle notes, the secretary of state's guidance is not mandatory, only advisory.

● Vermont: Republican Gov. Phil Scott has signed a law making a number of temporary changes to Vermont election laws to address the coronavirus pandemic. Among the most significant, Democratic Secretary of State Jim Condos now has the power to order that any election this year be conducted by mail, as long as Scott agrees.

● Wisconsin: Wisconsin's Tuesday elections careened toward chaos as Democratic Gov. Tony Evers announced on Friday that he would call a special session of the legislature for Saturday, imploring Republican leaders to immediately pass legislation postponing the presidential primary and state Supreme Court general election so that the state could instead hold it by mail. But just a short while afterward, top Republicans vehemently shot down Evers' request and vowed not to take any action to protect voting.

Evers called the special session after a federal judge on Thursday declined to delay in-person voting even as citizens remained under a "stay at home order" due to the coronavirus pandemic and officials across the state said they would be unable to operate the vast majority of polling sites. Republicans swiftly appealed the parts of that order expanding voting access, as we'll detail below.

On Thursday, U.S. District Judge William Conley concluded that, despite the grave health risks, plaintiffs had failed to demonstrate that the harms posed by proceeding with Tuesday’s presidential primary and elections for state and local office outweighed the harms that postponing them would cause. Conley did, however, agree to give voters one extra day to request absentee ballots, moving the deadline from Thursday to Friday.

He also relaxed the requirement that those voting absentee have their ballot witnessed, allowing voters to instead provide a written statement explaining they were "unable to safely obtain a witness certification" despite reasonable efforts. However, he left it to the "individual discretion of clerks as to whether to accept a voter’s excuse." He also ruled that votes already cast without witness signatures could be deemed valid so long as those voters affirm they weren't able to safely obtain them.

Most significantly, Conley ordered officials to accept any mail ballots they received by 4 PM on April 13, extending the deadline from 8 PM on Election Day. Conley emphasized that his directive did not specify ballots be postmarked by a particular date, meaning voters could in theory cast ballots after April 7. In a subsequent clarification, Conley also said that results could not be released until the 13th.

Despite these relatively modest adjustments, Republicans immediately filed an appeal, which the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals granted in part late on Friday by staying the section of Conley's ruling that had allowed voters to cast absentee ballots without witness signatures. However, the appellate court denied the GOP's request to block the extension of the deadline to return absentee ballots. It's possible that either party could file further appeals in the next few days, but given the 7th Circuit's heavy lean to the right and the Supreme Court's conservative majority being strongly opposed to voting rights, Democrats likely won't have much luck on any appeal.

GOP leaders in the legislature for weeks have resisted calls to postpone the election, and with a crucial seat on the state Supreme Court in play, they may be counting on the virus to disproportionately suppress votes on the left. In part that's because social distancing is more difficult in denser urban areas, which make up the bulk of the Democratic vote; voters in more sparsely populated rural areas may be less deterred from voting in person. In addition, polling, including a new survey from Marquette Law School, shows Republicans are simply less concerned about the coronavirus in general.

But it's not just Republicans who've stood in the way of moving the election: Wisconsin Democrats have been furious with Evers for also opposing a postponement until the last minute. Evers had criticized legislative Republicans for not acting, but Democrats said he should have called a special session earlier to put pressure on them, something he declined to do until Friday. Evers has repeatedly maintained that he wouldn't try to unilaterally delay the election, with a spokesperson saying, "He doesn’t want to do it, and he also doesn’t have the authority to do it."

That's left the administration of in-person voting in an extremely precarious state. Even though election officials have received an enormous surge in absentee ballot applications—over 1.1 million as of Thursday—they also told Conley that some 500,000 voters "would still need to vote in person."

Where they will do so is in grave doubt. In Milwaukee, for instance—the state's largest city and home to a large majority of its black residents—officials announced that polling locations have been reduced from 180 to just 5, one for every 10,000 voters expected to vote in-person, and Democratic Mayor Tom Barrett even asked voters not to vote at the polls. Other cities such as Green Bay face similar closures due to a dearth of poll workers. Evers has called up the National Guard to operate polling places, though he acknowledged to Conley that Guard members "will not satisfy all of the current staffing needs."

If in the end Wisconsin cannot pull off an acceptable election, there may be one final twist. In a footnote, Conley said he would "reserve on the question as to whether the actual voter turnout, ability to vote on election day or overall conduct of the election and counting votes timely has undermined citizens’ right to vote." In other words, Conley is suggesting that he might entertain further challenges after the election, though it's impossible to say what sort of post facto remedies he might envision.

P.S. Separately, the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled earlier this week that Dane County Clerk Scott McDonell may not advise all voters they can request an absentee ballot without presenting a copy of their ID because they are "indefinitely confined" as a result of the governor's stay-at-home order. The court said that McDonell must follow guidance provided by the Wisconsin Elections Commission, which concluded, "Designation of indefinitely confined status is for each individual voter to make based upon their current circumstance." Milwaukee County Clerk George Christenson had also posted similar advice.

ELECTORAL REFORM

● St. Louis, MO: Supporters of an effort to change how St. Louis, Missouri votes in city elections have obtained enough valid signatures to put an initiative on the Nov. 3 ballot that would replace the current system of partisan primaries decided by plurality winner with a nonpartisan "approval voting" primary where the top-two finishers advance to the general election runoff. The city's Board of Aldermen has the option of passing the proposal itself (thereby removing it from the ballot), or it could place its own similar measure on the ballot, but if it doesn't act, this initiative will appear on the ballot as-is.

Approval voting is a relatively novel election reform that was only adopted for elections to public office in the United States for the first time in 2018, when Fargo, North Dakota passed an initiative enacting it for local elections. The system generally works by letting voters cast as many votes as there are candidates, with up to one vote per candidate. St. Louis would also use a variation on approval voting where the two candidates who win the most total votes would advance to a subsequent runoff instead of having the first-place finisher win outright in the first round, as is the case in Fargo.

The goal of this system is to eliminate the "spoiler" problem, where a candidate wins without majority support only because their opposition was divided. The approval approach attempts to ensure that the most broadly acceptable candidate prevails.

St. Louis is heavily black and heavily Democratic, so the Democratic primary effectively decides who will win most elections. Several recent elections have seen the victor prevail with just modest pluralities, such as the 2017 Democratic primary for mayor in which Lyda Krewson won by a 32-30 margin. Krewson is white and defeated a divided field of black opponents; had the city required majority support to win the nomination, this outcome could have been different.

FELONY DISENFRANCHISEMENT

● Florida: The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals has denied Florida Republicans' request for all 13 judges on the circuit to rehear their appeal after a three-judge panel had refused to overturn a lower court ruling that blocked Florida from enforcing the GOP's poll tax on the 17 plaintiffs who were unable to pay it off to regain their voting rights. Donald Trump flipped the 11th Circuit to a majority of Republican appointees late last year, making the circuit's refusal to rehear the case en banc surprising.

The case is still proceeding on the merits and will go to trial on April 27, but the lower court's temporary injunction will remain in effect. The district court recently signaled it would likely extend its ruling to the entire class of citizens affected by the poll tax, which could be several hundred thousand Floridians.

CAMPAIGN FINANCE

● Seattle, WA: The Supreme Court has declined to hear a case challenging the constitutionality of Seattle, Washington's public campaign finance system, which gives every registered voter four $25 vouchers that they can donate to their preferred candidates in city elections. Seattle became the first major U.S. city to adopt this type of public financing reform following a 2015 ballot measure, and its adoption led to a significant increase in small donations in subsequent local elections.

REDISTRICTING

● Redistricting: On Friday, the documentary feature film "Slay the Dragon," which explores gerrymandering and the successful effort to eliminate it in Michigan, will become available for online streaming and video on demand. Featuring reform activists and redistricting experts, including Daily Kos Elections' own Stephen Wolf, the film documents the impact of widespread (largely Republican) gerrymandering efforts after the 2010 census. A central focus is the key swing state of Michigan, including how GOP gerrymandering there enabled the Flint water crisis and how a grassroots movement in 2018 used a ballot initiative to finally end lawmakers' ability to draw their own districts.

VOTER SUPPRESSION

● Florida: Florida's Republican-run state government has settled a Democratic-backed lawsuit over the GOP's ban on early voting locations on college campuses by loosening restrictions that Republicans had enacted last year to get around a previous court ruling in this case.

In 2018, a federal court struck down a rule that had banned early voting on college campuses, allowing almost 60,000 voters to cast early ballots on campuses across the state that year. However, Republicans followed up last year by passing a law imposing indirect restrictions that would have effectively precluded early voting on campuses via an onerous parking availability requirement that most campuses couldn't possibly meet.

Democrats therefore continued to sue, and the new settlement significantly relaxes those parking restrictions. Consequently, county election officials will have the ability to establish early voting sites on campuses for the August state primary and November general election.

● Kentucky: As expected, Democratic Gov. Andy Beshear has vetoed the voter ID bill that Republicans recently passed. However, Republicans will almost certainly be able to override his veto, since it only takes a simple majority to do so.

● Tennessee: In a surprising reversal, Tennessee Republicans have passed a law that repeals certain parts of a 2019 law that they had enacted to add criminal and civil penalties to key parts of voter registration drives, which a federal court had temporarily blocked last September as likely to infringe upon voters' constitutional rights. Republicans passed this 2019 law after organizers registered tens of thousands of new black voters in 2018, since black voters are more likely to be registered through such drives.

For those who had registered 100 or more voters, the law had made it a crime to do so without completing a state training course. It also made it a crime to fail to submit completed forms within 10 days. At the same time, groups that submitted 100 or more incomplete or inaccurate registration forms would have faced civil fines, which could have reached a steep $10,000 per county (Tennessee has 99 counties) if more than 500 such forms were found to have been submitted in a given county.

However, the revised law still includes a measure to make registration drives less effective by making it a crime to pay workers based on the number of registrations they gather. Instead, organizers would have to pay hourly or rely on volunteers, which eliminates the financial incentive for registration drive workers to register as many voters as they can during their shifts.

Repealing the challenged parts of this law will likely render the litigation over it moot. By capitulating in this manner, Republicans have now signaled their own doubts about their prospects for success in court.

SUPREME COURT ELECTIONS

● Georgia: Georgia voters have filed a federal lawsuit challenging Republican Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger's decision to cancel a May 19 state Supreme Court election. Raffensperger canceled the election after GOP-appointed Justice Keith Blackwell announced he intends to resign in November, which is several weeks before his term was set to end. The move gave Republican Gov. Brian Kemp the power to appoint Blackwell's replacement and put off a potentially competitive election until 2022.

This lawsuit comes after a state court recently rejected a lawsuit brought by candidates from both parties who had intended to run in the now-canceled nonpartisan election. The plaintiffs in that case are appealing to the Georgia Supreme Court, which is dominated by conservative justices.

Election experts have widely recommended that Congress use its authority to immediately require and fund the switch to extensive voting by mail (at least in federal elections) as a way to guarantee that elections still go forward and are conducted in a manner that minimizes potential exposure to the virus among voters and election workers. However, it will take time, effort, and organization to ensure that states can effectively implement such policies, and related measures will be necessary to ensure mail voting doesn’t disenfranchise anyone. This is why Congress must act as soon as possible.

Congressional Republicans, who've long been hostile to voting rights, strongly opposed provisions to make it easier to vote. Democrats can still try to reach a future compromise by agreeing to make these provisions temporary emergency measures rather than, as Pelosi envisioned, enshrining them into law permanently. By doing so, Democrats can demonstrate to the public that they are acting in good faith and not taking advantage of a crisis for alleged partisan gain.

Furthermore, because Republican-leaning states are least likely to make it easy to vote by mail as shown on the map at the top of this post (see here for a larger version), and because the GOP's elderly voter base is most at risk of serious illness, it's in Republicans’ own interest to ensure that voters have alternatives to in-person voting this year. Indeed, even Republicans in red states such as Ohio, Indiana, and Montana have called for a switch to mail voting.

Regardless, Democrats must make these voting provisions a red line that cannot be crossed when it comes to supporting any future stimulus package. With the economy in free fall and Trump's re-election chances dropping along with it, Republicans realize that it's in their immediate partisan interest to stabilize our economic situation. Because of that, Democrats hold tremendous leverage.

Democrats must therefore hold the line and demand that any further stimulus measures include these voting provisions to ensure our elections can go on. Donald Trump lacks the power to postpone the November elections, but they could become a catastrophe if millions of voters are unable to vote. As Congress fights to resolve our public health and economic crises, it must also act to avert a constitutional crisis.

ELECTION CHANGES

The following states have recently moved their primaries for various positions from the presidency down to local office:

• Delaware: from April 28 to June 2 (presidential) and from May 12 to June 16 (school board)
• Massachusetts: from March 31 to May 19 and June 2 (special elections)
• Ohio: from March 17/June 2 to April 28 (presidential and downballot)
• Pennsylvania: from April 28 to June 2 (presidential and downballot)
• Puerto Rico: from March 29 to April 26 (Democratic presidential)
• Rhode Island: from April 28 to June 2 (presidential)

You can stay on top of all changes to statewide primary dates by bookmarking our 2020 calendar.

● Alaska: Alaska's Republican-run state Senate has unanimously passed a bill that would allow Republican Lt. Gov. Kevin Meyer to order that the state's Aug. 18 downballot primaries be conducted entirely by mail. (The lieutenant governor is Alaska's chief election official.) However, Republicans blocked an attempt by Democrats to require that the state provide dropboxes where voters can return their ballots, an option that is very popular in states that have adopted universal voting by mail, in part because it obviates the need for a postage stamp and avoids the risk of delayed mail return service.

The bill now goes to the state House, which is controlled by a Democratic-led coalition that includes Republicans and independents. The Alaska Daily News says that Republican Gov. Mike Dunleavy is "expected" to sign the measure "speedily" if both chambers pass it.

Alaska Democrats have also canceled in-person voting for their April 4 presidential primary and will instead extend the deadline by which absentee ballots must be received to April 10 (previously, ballots had to be postmarked by March 24). Ballots have already been mailed to 71,000 voters, but voters can also download a ballot from the party's website.

● Arkansas: Officials in Arkansas have announced that they will not postpone the state's March 31 runoffs, making it the only state in the nation still set to conduct primary elections in the month of March. While no congressional or statewide elections will host runoffs, 12 counties that make up about 30% of the state's population will do so for local races. Administrators say they have reduced the number of polling locations and are encouraging voters to cast ballots absentee. While Arkansas normally requires an excuse to vote absentee, the state's Board of Election Commissioners has said all voters may request absentee ballots for the runoffs due to the coronavirus.

Separately, the NAACP filed a federal lawsuit on Friday seeking to count ballots that are postmarked by Election Day so long as they are received no more than 10 days later; currently, the state disqualifies all ballots not received by Election Day. The plaintiffs argue that the current deadline illegally discriminates against black voters.

● California: Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom has ordered that all voters be sent mail-in ballots for the May 12 special election taking place in California's 25th Congressional District. A small number of in-person polling sites will remain open to assist voters who need help in casting ballots.

● Delaware: Democratic Gov. John Carney has issued an order allowing all voters in the June primary to request an absentee ballot (Delaware is one of 17 states that requires an excuse to vote absentee).

● Georgia: Republican Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger says his office will send absentee ballot application forms to all active Georgia voters for the state's May 19 presidential and downballot primary, a plan that officials had previously floated. Voters will still need to return the forms (which are not postage-paid) in order to receive a ballot.

● Hawaii: Hawaii Democrats have canceled the in-person portion of their April 4 presidential primary, which was set to be conducted mostly by mail to begin with. To compensate, the party will mail out a third round of ballots to voters.

● Idaho: Republican Secretary of State Lawrence Denney's office has announced that voters may now request absentee mail ballots online after Democrats had called on the state to give voters this option as an alternative to mailing in their requests.

● Indiana: Indiana's bipartisan Election Commission has unanimously waived the state's requirement that voters who wish to vote absentee in June's presidential and downballot primaries provide an excuse in order to do so.

● Iowa: Republican Secretary of State Paul Pate is allowing absentee voting for Iowa's June 2 downballot primaries to begin on April 23, 11 days earlier than the statutory May 4 start date. Before the passage of a voter ID bill in 2017, this 40-day absentee period was the law in Iowa. Pate also postponed three elections for local office until July 7.

● Maryland: Maryland's Board of Elections is recommending to GOP Gov. Larry Hogan that the state's June 2 presidential and downballot primaries be conducted entirely by mail, with all voters receiving a mail-in ballot and in-person voting completely eliminated. That last provision could result in a lawsuit, because federal law requires states to make voting accessible for people with disabilities, and not all voters are able to cast ballots by mail.

In fact, in the board's discussion of the April 28 special election in Maryland's 7th Congressional District, which will be conducted by mail, one board official even noted that state law requires election administrators to offer in-person voting to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act. However, according to the board's website, there will be no in-person voting for the special election.

● Massachusetts: Republican Gov. Charlie Baker has signed a bill that gives towns the ability to reschedule any local election that was set to take place by May 30 to as late as June 30. The measure also allows all voters to request an absentee mail ballot for these elections (Massachusetts normally requires an excuse to vote absentee).

● Michigan: Democratic Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson says that she will send postage-paid absentee ballot applications to all voters able to participate in Michigan's May 5 local elections. Voters will still need to return the applications in order to receive a ballot, but they can also check a box that allows them to permanently receive an absentee ballot application in all future elections. Benson also says that her office will help local governments ensure that postage-paid return envelopes are included with any ballots.

● Minnesota: Democratic Secretary of State Steve Simon says that Minnesota is considering the possibility of conducting all voting by mail for its "2020 statewide elections," which presumably would include both the state's Aug. 11 downballot primaries and the November general election. As an alternative, Simon says officials may encourage voters to cast absentee ballots, a method that almost a quarter of the state used in 2018.

● Missouri: Republican Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft says that the possibility of relaxing Missouri's excuse requirement to vote absentee by mail is "on the table," though he indicated that such a change would require action by the GOP legislature. Ashcroft also sounded largely opposed to the idea of holding elections entirely by mail.

● Montana: Following requests from officials in both parties, Democratic Gov. Steve Bullock has told county election officials that they may conduct the state's June 2 presidential and downballot primaries almost entirely by mail. Voters would be sent ballots with postage-paid return envelopes, and they'd also be able to vote in person during the state's early voting period, which runs for 30 days leading up the primary.

● Nebraska: Republican Secretary of State Bob Evnen now says that all Nebraska voters will be sent an absentee ballot application ahead of the state's May 12 presidential and downballot primaries; previously, only some counties were planning to do so.

● Nevada: Republican Secretary of State Barbara Cegavske and local election officials from all 17 Nevada counties have announced plans to conduct the state's June 9 downballot primaries almost entirely by mail. Every active registered voter will be sent a postage-paid absentee ballot that they can return by mail or at an in-person polling site, of which each county will have at least one. Importantly, these voters will not have to request a ballot.

Ballots must be postmarked or turned in by Election Day, though they will still count as long as they are received up to seven days later. Officials will also contact any voter whose ballot has an issue (such as a missing signature), and voters will have until the seventh day after the election to correct any problems. Cegavske's press release wisely cautions that, under this system, final election results will not be known until well after election night, though this is a point that officials across the country will have to emphasize loudly and repeatedly as mail voting becomes more widespread.

One potential issue with Cegavske's plan, though, is that registered voters who are listed as "inactive" on the voter rolls will not be sent ballots. However, as voting expert Michael McDonald notes, these voters are still eligible to vote, and every election, many do. While they can still request absentee ballots on their own, they now face an obstacle that active voters will not. Approximately 14% of Nevada's 1.8 million registered voters are on inactive status.

● New Mexico: Democratic Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham reportedly plans to call a special session of the legislature (which is run by Democrats) to address emergency responses to the coronavirus, including the possibility of moving to all-mail elections this year. Democratic Secretary of State Maggie Toulouse Oliver says that she and other election officials are also looking into the matter, though she says she believes it would take an act of the legislature to switch to a fully vote-by-mail system.

● New York: Democratic Attorney General Tish James has asked Gov. Andrew Cuomo, a fellow Democrat, to issue an executive order mandating that all New Yorkers be sent mail-in ballots so that they can vote from home in New York's April 28 presidential primary. A special election for the state's vacant 27th Congressional District is also set for that date.

Democratic Assemblyman Jeff Dinowitz has also introduced a bill that would allow all voters to request an absentee ballot due to the coronavirus, since New York still requires an excuse to vote absentee and can't outright repeal that requirement before 2022. Cuomo has said he's looking into whether he can expand absentee access under his own authority, or whether legislative action is required.

Meanwhile, Democratic state Sen. Jen Metzger has introduced a bill that would enable universal mail voting amid public health crises. Were the bill to become law, every voter would be sent a ballot for the state's June 23 downballot primaries.

● North Carolina: North Carolina's Board of Elections has asked Democratic Gov. Roy Cooper and the Republican-run legislature to make a number of changes that would make absentee voting easier. The board's recommendations include:

• allowing voters to request absentee ballots online, or to return applications via email or fax;
• relaxing the state's requirement that absentee ballots be witnessed by two people or a notary, either by reducing the requirement to one witness or eliminating it entirely;
• having the state provide postage-paid return envelopes for absentee ballots; and
• making Election Day in November a state holiday so that a wider part of the workforce would be able to serve as poll workers.

● North Dakota: Republican Gov. Doug Burgum has signed an executive order giving North Dakota counties the option to hold the state's June 9 downballot primaries entirely by mail. The order directs the secretary of state to send absentee ballot applications to all voters, with postage-paid return envelopes.

Burgum's order also allows counties to eliminate all in-person voting sites, however, which could potentially cause serious problems on Native reservations where mail service is limited. In addition, it could run afoul of federal laws requiring that voting be accessible to persons with disabilities, though the order does specify that officials must make "at least one assistive ballot marking device" available at each county's courthouse from 40 days prior to the election through Election Day.

● Ohio: Republican Gov. Mike DeWine has signed a law that the GOP legislature unanimously passed to extend the time to vote absentee by mail in the state's presidential and downballot primaries until April 28. There would be limited in-person voting only for people with disabilities or who lack a home address, and voters would also be able to drop off absentee ballots in person on that day, but ballots would have to be mailed by April 27 and be received by May 8 in order to count. However, voting rights groups have expressed serious reservations about the plan and say they may sue.

Under the bill, the state would send postcards to voters explaining how to request an absentee ballot application. Voters would then have to print out applications on their own, or request one be mailed to them, and then mail them in—they cannot be submitted online. They would then have to mail in their absentee ballots (though these at least would come with a postage-paid envelope).

Voting rights advocate Mike Brickner notes that there is very little time left to carry out this multi-step process, particularly because each piece of mail would be in transit for several days. In addition, printing all of these materials, including the postcards that are designed to kick off this effort, will take considerable time, especially since government offices, the postal service, and print shops "may not be operating optimally," as Brickner observes. Local election officials are also opposed and say that a date in mid-May is more realistic.

● Rhode Island: Democratic Gov. Gina Raimondo has signed an executive order directing the state Board of Elections to conduct a "predominantly mail ballot" election, which Democratic Secretary of State Nellie Gorbea had previously advised. The state Board of Elections has also asked Raimondo to issue another order removing the requirement that voters have their absentee ballot notarized or signed by two witnesses. The board has also requested that voters be allowed to provide additional information in case officials say the signature on their ballot does not match the one on file.

● South Carolina: Election officials in South Carolina are weighing whether to implement excuse-free absentee voting and early voting, as well as moving to an all-mail election for the state's June 9 downballot primaries. Any changes would require an executive order by Republican Gov. Henry McMaster or action by the GOP legislature.

● Virginia: Statewide organizations representing local election officials have asked Virginia's Department of Elections to cancel in-person voting for the state's May 5 local elections and June 9 congressional primary and instead conduct them by mail. The Department of Elections has already allowed all voters to vote absentee in May's local elections but have yet to do so for June's primaries. Democratic Gov. Ralph Northam is expected to approve a bill by April 11 that would permanently remove the excuse requirement to vote absentee by mail, but it wouldn't take effect until July 1.

● West Virginia: Republican Secretary of State Mac Warner says all voters will be sent an absentee ballot application with a postage-paid return envelope ahead of West Virginia's May 12 presidential and downballot primaries. Previously, Warner effectively waived the state's requirement that voters provide an excuse to vote absentee by allowing all voters to cite the coronavirus as their reason.

● Wisconsin: On Friday, just a week-and-a-half before Wisconsin's April 7 elections, Democratic Gov. Tony Evers asked the Republican-run legislature to pass a bill sending every voter an absentee ballot. The proposal was immediately rejected, however: State Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald angrily accused Evers of "lying directly to Wisconsinites about this even being remotely possible."

Earlier this week, voting rights advocates brought a new lawsuit asking a federal judge to bar Wisconsin officials from enforcing a state law that requires voters to have a witness sign their absentee ballots. Meanwhile, election clerks in Wisconsin's two largest counties, the Democratic strongholds of Milwaukee and Dane (home of Madison), have advised voters that they do not need to upload a copy of their ID when requesting an absentee ballot online, a move aimed at helping voters who lack the necessary technological means. Republicans filed a lawsuit with the conservative-majority state Supreme Court late on Friday to stop Dane County from doing so.

In Green Bay, city officials filed a lawsuit on Tuesday asking that a federal judge order Wisconsin officials to delay the state's April 7 elections until June 2 and to extend its voter registration deadline to May 1, while a voter turnout group called Souls to the Polls filed a separate but similar federal lawsuit on Thursday. (The deadline for registering by mail has already passed, but voters can still register online through March 30 thanks to an earlier order by a different judge.) Green Bay has also asked that it be allowed to cancel in-person voting and mail ballots to all registered voters.

● Wyoming: Wyoming Democrats, who had previously canceled in-person voting for their April 4 presidential caucus, have now moved to an entirely vote-by-mail election. This means that voters will no longer be able to drop off ballots in person. In addition, the deadline by which ballots must be received has been extended to April 17 (previously, ballots had to be postmarked by March 20).

ELECTION SECURITY

● Kentucky: A committee in Kentucky's Republican-majority state House has passed a bill to require that all votes be cast via a method that produces a voter-verifiable paper trail. However, the bill does not allocate the millions in funding needed for counties to buy new voting equipment to replace paperless voting machines they're still using, and it would only require that they make the change whenever they decide to replace their current machines.

BALLOT ACCESS

● West Virginia: A federal district court has denied West Virginia's motion to dismiss a Democratic-backed lawsuit arguing that the way the state determines the ordering of how candidates appear on the ballot violates the U.S. Constitution.

State law requires that the party that won the most votes in the last presidential election in the state be listed first for all partisan offices. Because of the state's heavily Republican lean at the presidential level, that means the GOP gets listed first in all downballot races.

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 a close election, particularly in downballot races where voters have much less information about the candidates than they do for the top of the ticket. Thanks to the court's ruling, plaintiffs will now have the chance to have their case decided on its merits.

VOTER REGISTRATION AND VOTING ACCESS

● Michigan: A federal district court has denied a motion to dismiss a Democratic-supported lawsuit challenging Michigan's procedures for rejecting mail ballots over problems with a voter's signature supposedly not matching. The court also allowed Republican legislative leaders to intervene as defendants (plaintiffs originally named Democratic Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson as the sole defendant).

The plaintiffs contend that the ballot rejection process is arbitrary and lacks a statewide standard. Michigan law does not require officials to notify voters that their ballots have been rejected or allow them to challenge any such rejections. Similar laws have been struck down in other states in recent years.

● Utah: Republican Gov. Gary Herbert has signed into law a measure that repeals Utah's straight-ticket voting option, which passed with the support of every Democratic legislator and most Republicans. Proponents of the repeal law, which was sponsored by a Democrat, have argued that the change would make voters more thoughtful about their choices. Nevertheless, in an era of historic partisan polarization, repealing the option is unlikely to significantly increase split-ticket voting.

Instead, academic research on the experience in North Carolina, which eliminated straight-ticket voting in 2013, found that the move increased voting lines by making it take longer for voters fill out the ballot. That in turn likely deterred some people from voting and had a disproportionate effect on black voters because they voted straight tickets more often. However, because Utah overwhelmingly votes by mail, long voting lines are far less of a concern than in other states, though the absence of the straight-ticket option could increase the rate of undervoting in races further down the ballot.

Utah's move leaves only six states with the option to check a single box to vote for every candidate on the ballot affiliated with that particular party.

VOTER SUPPRESSION

● North Carolina: On Tuesday, North Carolina's Court of Appeals rejected Republicans' request for all 15 judges on the court to review of a February ruling by three judges that had overturned a lower court ruling and temporarily blocked the GOP's voter ID statute. The case is currently proceeding on the merits, with plaintiffs arguing that Republicans acted with the intent to discriminate against black voters in enacting their voter ID law. GOP legislators could appeal to the state Supreme Court, but given its 6-1 Democratic majority, a reversal appears unlikely.

Earlier this year, a federal court issued its own preliminary injunction in a separate case ahead of an upcoming trial, and a panel of three judges on the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a lower court ruling on Friday to allow GOP legislative leaders to intervene as defendants.

Democratic state Attorney General Josh Stein had previously announced he would wait until after the March 3 primaries to appeal the federal ruling (Stein has a general obligation to defend state laws in most instances), so the voter ID requirement was already on hold in this month's vote. However, this latest state-court decision means the law could remain suspended for the November general election while the case proceeds.

FELONY DISENFRANCHISEMENT

● Florida: Federal Judge Robert Hinkle has given Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis' administration an ultimatum to establish a process to determine which citizens who've served felony sentences are unable to pay off their outstanding court fines and fees and therefore cannot remain subject to the GOP's modern-day poll tax. That law requires the payment of such debts before people with felony convictions can regain their voting rights. Hinkle said that if the state does not act before the start of trial on April 27, he would institute the necessary measures himself.

Hinkle also said on Thursday that he would grant class certification in the case, meaning that his ruling could soon apply to the hundreds of thousands of Floridians who are unable to pay off their court debts to regain their voting rights. Previously, Hinkle had temporarily blocked the poll tax from going into effect, but that decision only applied to the 17 individuals who had brought the case against the law last year.

​Universal vote-by-mail works by having officials send every registered voter a ballot that they can return by mail. Under such a system, states and localities can operate far fewer in-person voting locations and need far fewer poll workers to operate them. Ideally, the postage on ballots is prepaid, and voters are given ample time to cast their ballots without hassle. That includes being able to postmark ballots as late as Election Day, or to return them in person at one of numerous drop box locations. Officials must also continue to provide access to a limited number of in-person voting locations for those who still want to vote that way or are physically unable to do so by mail.

As shown on the map at the top of this post (see here for a larger version), Colorado, Hawaii, Oregon, Utah, and Washington have already transitioned to universal voting by mail. In many other states, voters can sign up to receive mail ballots on a permanent basis, which is why majorities in some states such as California, Arizona, and Montana already cast ballots by mail.

Meanwhile, several states, including Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Virginia, have in recent years made it considerably easier to vote absentee by mail. But a large number of states still don’t allow voters to cast absentee ballots without providing an excuse, such as illness or being away from home.

Adopting universal voting by mail is imperative now that the coronavirus has become a pandemic that could infect most Americans. As governments urge citizens to avoid crowded public spaces and to vigilantly wash their hands, asking millions of people to stand in lines on Election Day and use the same voting machines and the same pens to fill out paper ballots threatens public health and could dampen voter turnout. Furthermore, because poll workers are disproportionately the same elderly Americans who are most at risk, states and localities may have trouble finding enough poll workers, and those who do show up will be at greater risk of catching or spreading the disease.

These problems should be largely avoidable with universal voting by mail, since it almost entirely eliminates in-person voting and the public gatherings that go with it. Furthermore, mail voting is a cost-saving measure that frees up resources for other priorities because governments have to operate far fewer in-person polling places. It also has a long track record of increasing voter turnout in the states that have adopted it, thanks to how easy it makes it to vote, especially when prepaid postage negates the need for voters to go to the post office.

Of course, voting by mail is not a silver bullet, as it can create problems for voting access if not implemented properly alongside other voting methods for those who can't easily vote by mail. It also poses a health risk of its own: Washington’s secretary of state has urged voters not to lick their ballot return envelopes to seal them and instead moisten their envelopes with a sponge to minimize the chance that those handling ballots come into contact with potentially infected saliva.

Congress has the power to mandate that every state implement universal voting by mail, and if it acts now, it can provide states with the necessary funds to do so before November. Should Trump and Senate Republicans block House Democrats from passing such a bill, states themselves should take action to fully shift to vote-by-mail, and if that's not possible, then at least broadly expand no-excuse absentee voting. Doing so quickly will ensure that any new system can be properly implemented.

In fact, officials in a number of states have already taken action to protect voters. The list below details a few of these activities:

• Alabama: Republican Secretary of State John Merrill said self-quarantined voters will be able to vote absentee (Alabama requires an excuse to do so).
• Connecticut: Democratic Secretary of State Denise Merrill asked Democratic Gov. Ned Lamont to issue an executive order loosening the excuse requirement for absentee ballots.
• Maryland: Republican Gov. Larry Hogan is deciding whether to issue an executive order turning the April 28 primary into an entirely by-mail election.
• Massachusetts: Democratic Secretary of State Bill Galvin requested emergency powers from legislators that would allow him to postpone an election, move polling places, extend legal deadlines by up to 45 days, and authorize alternative voting methods, which could include mail voting or electronic voting for first responders.
• New York: Democratic state Sen. Alessandra Biaggi introduced a bill to permit absentee ballots during public health crises (New York currently requires an excuse). The Board of Elections in Erie County, which is home to Buffalo and nearly 300,000 registered voters, announced it was opening absentee voting to all voters countywide in April's presidential primary.
• Ohio: Republican Secretary of State Frank LaRose ordered all polling places located in senior centers and nursing homes to be moved.
• Pennsylvania: Democratic state Rep. Kevin Boyle introduced a bill to mail every primary voter a ballot.
• Wyoming: The state Democratic Party announced it was suspending the in-person part of their April 4 presidential caucus but that drop-off mail ballot voting would continue.

Finally, the ACLU has published a guide on how to request an absentee ballot in states with upcoming primaries.

2020 CENSUS

● 2020 Census: On Thursday, the Census Bureau unveiled its online portal for the 2020 census, which is the first-ever to be conducted primarily online. The bureau is mailing a 12-digit census ID to every American, which can be used to fill out the census on the web. It's possible to complete the census online without this number, but experts advise waiting for it to arrive as it will help census workers verify responses more easily. If, however, you do not receive an ID number by March 20, you should proceed without one.

As in decades past, millions of Americans have also been sent physical census forms that they can complete and mail back. It's also possible to respond over the phone. Every person residing in the U.S. regardless of their citizenship or immigration status is obligated to complete the census (note it does not ask about citizenship). For those who don't complete it online, by mail, or by phone, census workers will try to contact them in-person at their residence to get them to complete it ahead of the bureau's April 1 deadline.

Americans who complete the census on their own can make it significantly easier for the bureau to reach those who are hardest to count, such as those who lack reliable internet or mail service. Furthermore, completing the census without the need for a census worker to come to your door can help mitigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, which threatens to disrupt the census' operations.

The outbreak could in fact have an impact on the census. Amid an ongoing wave of closures among businesses and schools, the Census Bureau told the House Oversight Committee on Friday that it could extend the census if necessary because of the disease, with officials saying they are monitoring response rates before making that determination.

BALLOT MEASURES

● Alaska: Supporters of an initiative effort that would change Alaska's electoral system have submitted enough valid signatures to qualify for November's ballot if it survives an upcoming court battle. The measure would replace Alaska's traditional primaries with a "top-four" primary where the four candidates with the most support advance to the general election, regardless of party. In the general election, voters would use instant-runoff voting to choose from the final four. The initiative would also create campaign donor disclosure requirements for "dark money" donations that are currently exempt.

However, Alaska Republicans are trying to thwart the measure in court, arguing that it violates the limitation on the number of subjects a single initiative may address. A lower court previously ruled that the initiative could proceed, but an appeal is pending before the state Supreme Court.

● Florida: State House Republicans have passed a constitutional amendment over Democratic objections that it would impose additional restrictions on the initiative process. These restrictions follows on the heels of a 2019 GOP-backed statute that made it harder to put initiatives on the ballot, which itself was a reaction to several progressive measures that voters had passed over the last decade. Those measures included the restoration of voting rights for up to 1.4 million citizens who had been permanently banned from voting despite serving out felony sentences, as well as a pair of amendments that banned gerrymandering.

The GOP's new amendment would make it harder for organizers to place a measure before the state Supreme Court for review, a step required by law before an initiative can appear on the ballot. Currently, activists must gather 10% of the total number of signatures needed to qualify for the ballot statewide and in one-fourth of the state's 27 congressional districts in order to reach the Supreme Court. Republicans would increase that to 25% of the statewide total in half of all districts, which could waste significant time and resources if the court rejects a proposed measure.

The amendment would also require the state attorney general to ask the court whether proposals violate the U.S. Constitution; currently, the court's jurisdiction is confined to assessing whether the ballot summary language is accurate and the measure is limited to only one subject.

Additionally, the GOP's legislation would likely shorten the window to gather signatures. Under current law, organizers can collect signatures for up to two years; if they obtain a sufficient number, their initiative can appear on the ballot at the next general election. The GOP's new rule would instead invalidate all signatures after Feb. 1 of every even-numbered year. That would remove groups' ability to begin signature collection at the time of their choosing if they want to avail themselves of the full two-year period, in practice likely abbreviating the amount of time they have to gather petitions.

Unlike in the House, Republicans are one seat shy of the three-fifths majority in the state Senate needed to put the amendment on the ballot, and it's unclear if they have a Democrat willing to cross their party and support it. If the measure does make it onto the ballot, voters would have to approve it with a three-fifths supermajority for it to take effect.

● Ohio: Ohio's Supreme Court, which has a 5-2 conservative majority, has agreed to hear a legal challenge by the ACLU seeking to overturn a recent party-line decision by the state's Ballot Board to split a far-reaching voting rights initiative into four separate measures because it allegedly violated the single-subject limit for a ballot initiative. The ACLU is continuing to gather the signatures needed for each of the four measures, but if the group prevails in court, the measures would be reconsolidated.

The proposal includes automatic voter registration, same-day voter registration, a guaranteed number of early voting days, a ban on tightening Ohio's voter ID law to exclude non-photo IDs, and a requirement to carry out routine audits of election results.

VOTER SUPPRESSION

● Georgia: Republican Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger has settled a federal lawsuit brought by Democrats who were fighting Georgia's system of arbitrarily deciding which absentee ballots to reject over supposedly non-matching signatures, a process they've carried out without even notifying affected voters. Under the settlement, election officials must contact voters whose ballots are rejected within three days, or within one day if they are cast in the 11 days prior to an election, and give them a chance to fix the problem.

Absentee rejections were one of many issues that plagued the 2018 midterms, which were marred by voter suppression efforts by Republican Gov. Brian Kemp, who at the time was secretary of state. Statewide, 3% of absentee ballots were rejected, or more than 8,000 in total. But that rate varied widely by county: populous Democratic-leaning Gwinnett County in the Atlanta suburbs, for instance, had a rejection rate of more than 7%.

● Montana: The ACLU has filed a lawsuit in state court seeking to overturn a constitutional amendment that Republican legislators passed and voters approved in 2018 to limit who can turn in someone else's absentee mail ballot, saying that it illegally discriminates against Native American voters. The lawsuit argues that the amendment violates a number of protections in the state constitution, including the right to vote, freedom of speech, freedom of association, and due process.

The amendment makes it a felony to turn in someone else's absentee ballot unless the person doing so is the voter's family member, caregiver, household member, or acquaintance, and even those individuals may turn in no more than six others' absentee ballots. Only postal workers and election officials are fully exempt.

Montana is one of a few states that lets voters opt into permanently receiving an absentee mail ballot in all elections, which is intended to make it easier to vote, and most voters cast their ballot that way. However, because many Native Americans living on remote reservations lack reliable postal service and access to transportation, many ask others who do not face such barriers to turn in their ballots for them. Plaintiffs noted that get-out-the-vote organizers often collect 80 or more ballots each.

Neither liberals nor conservatives hold a reliable majority on Montana's Supreme Court, making it uncertain how the justices would rule if this case eventually reaches them.

● Ohio: A panel of three judges on the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals has overturned a district court decision, ruling that election officials do not have to extend the deadline for sending absentee ballots to those who are in jail awaiting trial. The lower court had blocked Ohio from enforcing its normal absentee ballot deadline for those inmates, which is the Saturday before Election Day, because it was tighter than the deadline for people in other emergency situations, such as those in the hospital, who have until 3 PM on Election Day to request a ballot.

This ruling means that anyone who hasn't already voted early and is arrested and jailed within the last few days preceding an election will be disenfranchised even though they haven't been convicted of a crime. The 6th Circuit, however, concluded that requiring election officials to provide ballots to individuals who find themselves in such situations (around 1,000 in a typical election) would be too burdensome on election officials and said that Ohioans could mitigate their risk by voting early. Plaintiffs have not said whether they will appeal.

● Wisconsin: The conservative group seeking to have Wisconsin to purge more than 200,000 voter registrations has asked the state Supreme Court to expedite its appeal after the state Court of Appeals ruled against it last month. In January, the plaintiffs had sought an expedited review by the high court, but the justices rejected the request in a 3-3 deadlock despite the court's 5-2 conservative majority.

That unexpected ruling came about because one conservative justice, Brian Hagedorn, sided with the court's two progressives, while Justice Dan Kelly, another conservative, recused himself because his seat is up for election on April 7. However, Kelly now says he could change his mind and participate in the case if it stretches out past the election. But even if Kelly loses, his successor wouldn’t take office until early August, meaning his participation could determine the outcome.

VOTER REGISTRATION AND VOTING ACCESS

● North Carolina: An African American voting rights advocacy group has filed a lawsuit in state court arguing that a bipartisan 2019 law to tighten absentee ballot requests in the wake of 2018's GOP election fraud scandal violates the state constitution. That scandal centered around a Republican operative who tampered with absentee ballots to fraudulently cast votes for the GOP candidate in the 9th Congressional District and may have discarded votes cast for the Democrat. In response, lawmakers near-unanimously enacted measures as part of a larger package of reforms to prevent a repeat occurrence in future elections.

However, the plaintiffs argue that by restricting who may assist voters with requesting an absentee ballot to only relatives, it prevents get-out-the-vote campaigns from encouraging absentee voting and therefore violates the state constitution's guarantee of the right to vote.

● Virginia: Democratic Gov. Ralph Northam has signaled he is likely to sign a number of election-related bills into law that Democrats recently passed in both chambers after taking control of the legislature for the first time in 25 years. Northam has already approved one measure that directs officials to count absentee ballots postmarked as late as Election Day, so long as they receive them no more than three days later.

Other bills awaiting Northam's signature include one that mandates prepaid postage on mail ballots, which are set to become more popular since Democrats also passed legislation to make it significantly easier to cast an absentee ballot. Another measure would replace the GOP's photo voter ID requirement with a provision allowing non-photo IDs such as a bank statement or utility bill.

However, Democrats failed to pass a bill before adjourning last week that would have revived a key protection of the Voting Rights Act that the Supreme Court's conservatives gutted in 2013. The state Senate and House each passed separate versions of the bill but were unable to agree on a single version, which would have required all localities in the state to obtain "preclearance" from the state attorney general (currently Democrat Mark Herring) or a state court before enacting any changes to election procedures to ensure they didn't discriminate against any racial, ethnic, or language minority.

CAMPAIGN FINANCE AND BALLOT ACCESS

● Florida: Florida's Republican-majority state House has passed a constitutional amendment with a large bipartisan majority to repeal the state's public financing system for statewide executive elections. If the GOP-run state Senate also approves the measure with at least a three-fifths majority, it would go to the voters in November, who would also have to pass it with at least 60% support for it to take effect. It's unclear why most Democrats sided with Republicans to pass it, especially after Democratic candidates made use of the program in 2018.

Under current law, candidates for statewide offices who raise qualifying contributions (at least $150,000 for governor and $100,000 for other offices) in increments of up to $250 receive public funding at a two-to-one matching rate. In return, they must agree to abide by expenditure limits of $2 per registered voter for governor or $1 per voter in other races, which in 2018 came out to $27 million and $13.5 million, respectively.

● New York: A state court has struck down the third-party ballot access restrictions and campaign finance regulations imposed by New York's State Public Campaign Financing Commission, which Democratic Gov. Andrew Cuomo and the Democratic legislature created after they were unable to agree on new reforms. The court held that the law creating the commission had itself violated the state constitution by improperly delegating legislative authority, siding with the progressive Working Families Party, which had sued over the commission's rules that would have made it harder for it to maintain access to the ballot.

Under the previous law, parties only had to win 50,000 votes in the most recent gubernatorial election to be automatically awarded a spot on the ballot over the next four years, and because New York's "fusion voting" lets candidates win the nomination of multiple parties, third parties play a prominent role in New York. However, the commission's now-invalidated rules required parties to meet a threshold every two years starting after 2022, and that benchmark would also increase: to either 2% or 130,000 votes in the preceding presidential election or gubernatorial contest, the latter of which takes place in midterms.

The WFP argued that Cuomo was retaliating against the party for backing a primary challenge against him from the left, prompting the organization to file suit alongside some legislators from both major parties.

This lawsuit also invalidates the campaign finance reforms the commission adopted, which set the donation limit for individual donors giving to statewide candidates at $18,000—considerably lower than the current $70,000 cap but still much higher than federal donation limits of $2,800 per election. The limits for state Senate and Assembly had also been lowered to $10,000 and $6,000, respectively. However, the commission hadn't reduced the limit for party committees, which can receive a hefty $117,300 from a single donor that they can then give to candidates.

The commission's public financing rules had set up a system where donations up to $50 were matched at a 12:1 ratio, those between $50 to $150 were matched 9:1, and those from $150 and $250 were matched 8:1. While that meant a $250 donation could qualify for an extra $2,300 in matching funds, the new system imposed a sharp limitation by only applying to donors who live within the district that a candidate is running for. That curtailed the effectiveness of this new program, particularly for campaigns in less affluent districts, and all of the campaign finance measures fell far short of what good government groups have advocated for.

Democratic state Attorney General Tish James, a Cuomo ally, has not yet said whether she will appeal the ruling.

REDISTRICTING

● Arkansas: Redistricting reformers have filed a ballot initiative that would amend Arkansas' constitution to create an independent citizens' commission for congressional and legislative redistricting and are seeking to put it on November's ballot.

Currently, the Republican-run legislature would control congressional redistricting following this year's census, and an all-GOP board made up of the governor, secretary of state, and attorney general would oversee legislative redistricting. If this measure qualifies for the ballot and passes, it would prevent Republicans from using their first-ever opportunity to gerrymander the state.

The proposed measure would create a commission whose nine members cannot have been an elected official, lobbyist, party official, or an employee or relative of such people within the last five years. The state Supreme Court's chief justice would appoint a panel of three retired state judges to help select the commissioners from among citizen applicants, and they would group the applicants into three pools of 30 people each, one for Democrats, Republicans, and unaffiliated voters.

The governor and legislative leaders of both parties in each chamber would each be able to strike two applicants from each pool, whittling each group down to 20 names. The judges would then randomly select three applicants from each of the pools to choose the commission's nine members. It would take the vote of six members to pass any map, including a two-member majority from each of the three party groups.

The commissioners would be bound by several criteria when drawing maps, including that they be drawn using the total population and don't unduly favor any party. Commissions would also be required to consider, in order of priority, a number of other factors: contiguity; protection of racial and language minorities; barring county or city divisions except to satisfy the other criteria; compactness; and political competitiveness.

To qualify for the ballot, backers must obtain roughly 89,000 voter signatures, including signatures equal to 5% of the last gubernatorial vote in 15 of Arkansas' 75 counties. Importantly, 2020 could be the last chance to use an initiative to reform redistricting, since Republican lawmakers have placed a constitutional amendment of their own on November's ballot that could make it all but impossible to pass progressive-oriented ballot measures. The GOP's proposal would require that organizers gather signatures equal to 5% of the gubernatorial vote in 45 counties instead of just 15. Democratic voters, as Republican legislators are well aware, are heavily concentrated in a small number of counties.

● North Dakota: Election reformers have filed a ballot initiative to amend North Dakota's constitution in order to enact bipartisan redistricting reform and change both how North Dakotans cast their ballot and the electoral system they use.

The initiative would replace traditional primaries with a "top-four" system where the four candidates with the most support would advance to the general election regardless of party. From there, instant-runoff voting would be used to determine the winner. Additionally, the measure would require that any voting machines create a paper record of every vote (North Dakota currently uses paper ballots by default and voting machines for voters with disabilities) and that the secretary of state conduct routine audits of elections.

The other major change would be to remove the Republican-dominated legislature's control over state legislative redistricting (North Dakota only has a single congressional district, which covers the entire state). The proposal would hand redistricting over to the state Ethics Commission, which voters created with a 2018 ballot initiative. The Ethics Commission's five members are chosen unanimously by the governor and the majority and minority leaders of the state Senate. Commissioners can't be elected officials, candidates, or party officials, and unanimity would be required to pass any map.

The amendment would also impose several criteria on the maps commissioners could draw, listed in descending priority as follows: following federal law; equality based on total population; contiguity; ensuring minority groups and Native American tribes have an equal opportunity to elect their preferred candidates; barring maps that favor an incumbent, candidate, or party; keeping communities of interest whole; keeping local government jurisdictions, including tribal governments, whole; compactness; and maximizing political competitiveness.

It's unclear what would happen if the commissioners are unable to unanimously pass a map, since there is no provision in the amendment addressing such a scenario. Most likely, a federal or state court would step in to draw new districts, but there's no guarantee that judges would be bound by the specific criteria that the commission must follow. Nevertheless, either a commission or court-drawn map would likely be fairer than another decade of Republican gerrymandering.

To qualify for the ballot, supporters will have to gather nearly 27,000 signatures, equal to 4% of the state's 2010 census population.

● Oklahoma: Conservatives in Oklahoma have filed two new lawsuits in state court in an attempt to prevent a measure that would set up a new redistricting commission from appearing on the ballot this year.

Backers of the initiative revised and resubmitted their ballot summary text following the state Supreme Court's rejection of their original summary as inaccurate last month. In this latest suit, opponents argue that the new summary is also inaccurate; that the measure violates the U.S. Constitution by counting prisoners at their last address instead of where they are incarcerated; and that it's unconstitutional because it limits who can serve on the commission.

The measure in question would create an independent commission for congressional and legislative redistricting. The state Supreme Court previously ruled that it did not violate the First Amendment or the state constitution's limitation on initiatives addressing more than one subject. The high court has a 5-4 majority appointed by Democratic governors, but that alone is no guarantee that the court will reject these latest challenges.

● Utah: Utah Republicans have quickly passed a bill out of the legislature that could effectively gut the redistricting reform ballot initiative that voters passed in 2018. Most Democrats voted for the bill after extracting certain concessions from Republicans to stop them from completely repealing the bill, but it remains in doubt whether these concessions will actually prevent the GOP from gerrymandering again after the 2020 census.

The ballot initiative in question created a bipartisan advisory redistricting commission to recommend maps to the legislature drawn based on nonpartisan criteria. While the legislature could reject the commission's maps and draw their own, they'd still legally be bound by the same criteria. The original measure had legislative leaders from both parties each picking three members and the governor naming a seventh member as chair, and it would take five votes to recommend a map.

While this system would let Republicans appoint a majority thanks to their hold on the governor's office, it would take the vote of at least one of the Democratic appointees to pass a map. If the GOP-dominated legislature doesn't like what the commission proposes, it could pass its own maps, but it would still be constrained by the criteria described below, which could be enforced in state court.

In order of priority, those criteria are: following federal law and the Voting Rights Act; minimizing the number of divided municipalities; minimizing the number of divided counties; promoting compactness; ensuring transportation connections exist within districts; preserving neighborhoods and communities of interest; following natural geography; and nesting districts so that state Senate and state House borders overlap as much as possible. Most importantly, it bans unduly favoring or disfavoring any particular party or candidate intentionally and must be relatively "symmetrical" between the parties.

By contrast, the GOP's bill would let the commission recommend maps with a simple majority if they can’t obtain five votes, meaning Republicans would not need any Democratic support to approve a map. The partisan symmetry requirement would also be eliminated, and the commission would have greater flexibility to define the remaining criteria. Most importantly, the bill repeals the ability of voters to seek injunctive relief in court if the lawmakers pass a map that does not comply with the nonpartisan standards described above.

As such, this effectively invites GOP gerrymandering. Utah only lets voters initiate statutes instead of constitutional amendments, and with supermajority control, there was always the threat that Republicans could simply repeal the commission outright. While an outright repeal has not come to pass, it appears that this legislation is likely to neuter the commission.

STATE SUPREME COURT ELECTIONS

● Georgia: Two lawsuits have been filed in state court to require an election that Republican Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger canceled for a state Supreme Court seat. Justice Keith Blackwell, who was appointed to his post by former Republican Gov. Sonny Perdue, announced last month that he intended to resign in mid-November, six weeks before his term ends, rather than seek re-election. However, by calling off the planned May 19 election, Raffensperger's move would give Republican Gov. Brian Kemp the chance to appoint a replacement for Blackwell, who wouldn't have to go before voters until 2022.

Democratic Rep. John Barrow and former GOP state Rep. Beth Beskin each filed their separate lawsuits after being denied the chance to run for Blackwell's seat, arguing that Raffensperger violated the state constitution's guarantee that voters can select their Supreme Court justices. They also noted that Blackwell hasn't even resigned yet, saying that Kemp can't make an appointment while the seat is still occupied. If plaintiffs prevail, it's unclear if this litigation will be resolved quickly enough to reinstate a May election, or whether it would have to be delayed.

Notably, this is now the second Supreme Court election that Raffensperger has canceled and that Barrow and Beskin had intended to run in. The first was for the seat of former Democratic-appointed Justice Robert Benham, who unexpectedly announced late last year that he would resign in early March. No suits were filed in that instance, so Kemp will get the chance to fill that seat. Once he does, eight of the court's nine justices will have been selected by Republican governors.

FELONY DISENFRANCHISEMENT

● Florida: As part of the ongoing federal litigation over the Florida GOP's modern-day poll tax on people who've served their felony sentences but still owe court fines and fees, a University of Florida professor serving as an expert witness for the plaintiffs has filed a report with the court showing just how extensive the disenfranchisement caused by the poll tax would be if it remains in place.

The report estimates that of roughly 1 million people who were supposed to regain their voting rights, 775,000 of them still owe financial obligations in court and would be barred from voting, while only 226,000 are now eligible to vote. Furthermore, 43% of the disenfranchised are African American, roughly three times the black share of the state's overall adult population.

Other bills have seen different versions pass in both chambers, which must be reconciled. Those measures include bills to prepay the postage on absentee ballots and replace the GOP's photo voter ID requirement by allowing non-photo IDs to count.

Democrats also passed a bill in a state Senate committee to create a state-level replacement for a key provision of the Voting Rights Act that the Supreme Court struck down in 2013. The legislation would impose a requirement that all localities in the state "preclear" any proposed changes to election rules or procedures with either the state attorney general (currently Democrat Mark Herring) or with the state Court of Appeals to ensure that they do not discriminate against any racial, ethnic, or language minority. The state House has already approved the bill.

Virginia's legislative session is scheduled to end on March 7, so time is quickly running short to pass these remaining bills.

REDISTRICTING

● Colorado: Democrats in both chambers of the legislature have passed a bill largely along party lines to end the practice of prison gerrymandering by counting incarcerated people for redistricting purposes at their last address instead of where they are imprisoned (and can't even vote). Supporters expect Democratic Gov. Jared Polis to sign it into law. Roughly 19,000 people would be reassigned from locations with prisons to their prior communities, which could shift representation at the legislative and local levels from whiter communities with prisons to urban communities of color.

● Pennsylvania: The NAACP has filed a lawsuit in state court to end prison gerrymandering in Pennsylvania and require the state to count incarcerated people for redistricting purposes at their last address, arguing that the practice dilutes the power of certain groups of voters in violation of the state constitution's guarantee that "[e]lections shall be free and equal." If the plaintiffs prevail, ending prison gerrymandering would likely shift representation at the legislative and local levels from whiter rural communities to urban communities of color such as Philadelphia.

The constitutional provision plaintiffs are relying on is the same one that the state Supreme Court used to strike down Republicans' congressional gerrymander in 2018. The NAACP is also simultaneously waging a lawsuit in federal court over prison gerrymandering in Connecticut.

COURT CASES

● North Carolina: The good-government group Common Cause has asked the North Carolina Supreme Court to review a recent state Court of Appeals ruling that rejected the organization's challenge to a series of power grabs Republicans pushed through during the lame-duck session of the legislature following the 2016 elections. Last month, the appellate court rebuffed the plaintiffs' argument that the GOP's legislative blitzkrieg was executed so quickly that it violated the state constitution's guarantee of the people's right to instruct their legislature.

​As we've previously explained, the case has its origins in the 2016 elections, when Democratic Roy Cooper ousted Republican Gov. Pat McCrory and broke the GOP's grip on state government. In response, Republicans passed a law that removed the governor’s power to appoint a majority on the state Board of Elections and its county-level counterparts. McCrory’s administration had used its control over the boards to cut early voting and remove polling places from college campuses and heavily black communities. Removing Cooper’s power to appoint new majorities blocked Democrats from reversing those cuts.

Republicans also passed another law subjecting Cooper's cabinet appointees to confirmation by the GOP-dominated state Senate, a burden they had not placed on McCrory. Furthermore, they slashed the number of executive branch appointees from 1,500 to just 425, a reversal from the increase in such positions Republicans had pushed through after McCrory replaced his Democratic predecessor in 2012.

This madcap legislative session also saw the GOP transfer powers from the state Board of Education, whose members are chosen by the governor, to the state's superintendent of public instruction, a Republican elected official. In addition, they eliminated the governor’s ability to appoint members to the University of North Carolina’s board of trustees, instead granting that power to the legislature itself.

The Board of Elections power grab was eventually struck down, passed by the GOP once more and then struck down yet again multiple times, but Cooper finally was able to appoint a Democratic majority after the 2018 elections. However, most of the GOP's other power grabs are still in effect, as is another provision of the lame-duck legislation that made elections for the state Supreme Court and Court of Appeals elections partisan again after a period during which they were nonpartisan (a move that backfired on Republicans in 2018).

If the Supreme Court hears the case and the plaintiffs prevail, all of these other changes would also be struck down. The high court has a 6-1 Democratic majority, though that does not offer a guarantee of a different outcome, particularly seeing as the appeals court panel that heard the case was bipartisan.

ELECTORAL COLLEGE

● Virginia: Democrats failed to pass a bill out of state Senate committee that would add Virginia's 13 Electoral College votes to the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, dealing a setback to the effort to elect the president by popular vote. However, the bill is still alive and could be passed by the Senate after November's elections. State House Democrats already passed the bill, so future success in the Senate would send it to Democratic Gov. Ralph Northam, who has said he supports the bill.

VOTER REGISTRATION AND VOTING ACCESS

● Washington, D.C.: The heavily Democratic City Council in Washington, D.C. has passed two bills in committee to make it easier to vote, sending them to the full body for a vote. One of the bills would require both that employers give workers two hours of paid leave to vote and that schools give eligible students two hours of excused absence to vote. The other bill would require that new renters or homebuyers be given a voter registration form when they move, along with information on how and where to vote at their new address.

Every council member is sponsoring the paid leave for voting bill, and six of the 13 members are sponsoring the requirement that new tenants be given registration forms.

ELECTION SECURITY

● Georgia: A state court judge has rejected an emergency request to require Georgia to switch to regular paper ballots instead of using its new voting machines. Election security advocates with the Coalition for Good Governance filed a lawsuit on Monday arguing that the large screens on the new machines violate voters' privacy because they make their choices visible to potentially prying eyes, but the judge disagreed. The plaintiffs haven't said whether they will appeal but said that the "issue is far from over."

This same group has also been waging a federal lawsuit seeking to stop Georgia from implementing these new voting machines, which print a paper ballot that relies on a barcode that the plaintiffs say prevents voters from being able to verify that their choices have been accurately recorded. A federal district court previously blocked Georgia from continuing to use its old paperless voting machines, but the case remains ongoing in the plaintiffs' effort to stop the new barcode voting machines from being used.

ELECTIONS

● Arizona: The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has upheld a lower court ruling that rejected plaintiffs' bid to require a special election for appointed Republican Sen. Martha McSally's seat before November 2020, when an election is currently set to be held to fill the last two years of the late John McCain's original six-year term. The challengers had argued that special elections should be required for Senate vacancies under the 17th Amendment, but the court disagreed. The plaintiffs have not yet said whether they will continue to appeal.

VOTER SUPPRESSION

● Missouri: State House Republicans have given preliminary approval to a bill that would revive the GOP's photo voter ID requirement after the state Supreme Court recently struck it down and allowed the use of non-photo IDs.

This latest proposal would enact what would possibly be the strictest voter ID requirement in the country by mandating that voters present an unexpired Missouri driver's license, non-driver ID card, or a federal government-issued photo ID such as a military ID. If they don't have one, they can vote a provisional ballot that would only be counted if the voter returns with a valid photo ID the very same day at the same polling place.

Another vote in the state House is needed before the bill goes before the state Senate, but with Republicans holding large majorities in both chambers and the governor's office, this bill appears likely to become law. If that happens, another round of litigation is all but assured.

● Wisconsin: In a decision issued this week, the Wisconsin Court of Appeals has overturned a lower court ruling that had ordered the state's bipartisan Elections Commission to purge more than 200,000 voter registrations and found the Democratic commissioners in contempt for refusing to carry out the purge while their appeal was pending. However, this success could be short-lived.

At issue in this litigation is a GOP-backed law that requires voters to be removed from the rolls if anyone suspected of moving fails to respond within 30 days to a single mailing. Opponents have argued that the mailing was inadequate and that new notices should be sent to instruct those voters how to stay registered.

Last month, the appeals court temporarily blocked the lower court's decision. However, the conservative group bringing the case is appealing to the state Supreme Court, whose conservative majority will likely be sympathetic to their case.

Meanwhile, the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel has conducted an analysis of the voters who would be affected and found that most of them actually have voted in recent elections. The report found that 72% of them had cast ballots in the 2016 presidential election, 89% in at least one election since 2006, and 31% in all three presidential races since 2008.

FELONY DISENFRANCHISEMENT

● Kentucky: A supermajority in Kentucky's Republican-dominated state Senate has passed a bill to change a state law that imposes a lifetime ban on voting for anyone with a felony conviction. The GOP's proposed constitutional amendment would give the legislature the authority to set by statute how people who've served their felony convictions could regain their voting rights. That would allow lawmakers to, among other things, impose a waiting period before an affected citizen could regain their rights, which some Republicans would like to set at five years.

The GOP's amendment would also maintain a permanent ban for those convicted of a large number of different crimes, including any violent offense. People convicted of such crimes would have to obtain an individual pardon from the governor to regain their rights, which is currently the case for everyone with a felony conviction.

Roughly half of Democrats opposed the bill, with those voting against it saying it doesn't go far enough. Opponents also warned that it could undermine Democratic Gov. Andy Beshear's recent executive order that automatically restored voting rights to 140,000 people who had served their sentences for non-violent felonies. However, Republican state Senate President Robert Stivers claimed the amendment would not interfere with Beshear's order.

If the state House also approves the bill with a three-fifths supermajority support, it would go before voters as a referendum this fall. Beshear has no ability to veto the measure.