The newly reintroduced Freedom to Vote Act would prevent voter suppression, gerrymandering, and election sabotage. ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌

[link removed]

Last year, the Freedom to Vote Act came achingly close to enactment. It passed the House, had a majority of the Senate in support, and the president was ready to sign it. Only the refusal of two senators to change filibuster rules stopped the most important voting rights legislation in half a century from becoming law.

Today, the Freedom to Vote Act

[link removed]

was reintroduced in Congress. It would set national standards for voting rights and election administration. It presents a comprehensive solution to the most significant threats to our democracy — voter suppression, gerrymandering, election subversion, and more — and would block the worst excesses of the election denial movement.

Republican lawmakers will oppose the bill. But they stand athwart history.

For years, we have watched with alarm as an election denial movement threatened basic tenets of American democracy. When Donald Trump cynically launched a baseless attack on U.S. elections, he didn’t foresee that he would catalyze a powerful democracy movement. For the first time in generations, voters now view the protection and expansion of our democracy as a top priority.

This growing movement has shown power over the past 12 months. In swing states, voters rebuffed secretary of state candidates such as Kristina Karamo in Michigan and Mark Finchem in Arizona, who threatened to undermine elections from within. Election deniers underperformed other Republicans. Ballot initiatives expanding access to voting passed in many states last year. Even the Supreme Court, breaking its pattern of more than a decade, stepped back from further gutting the Voting Rights Act and rejected a crackpot idea that would have given state legislatures unfettered power over elections.

But the assault on democratic institutions continues. In Georgia, Texas, and beyond, legislatures continue to erect barriers to voting. Legislators in several states have curbed voter registration drives, restricted access to mail voting, and tightened voter ID requirements. Election officials are being threatened with politically motivated prosecution. Partisan actors are preparing bogus election audits in a desperate attempt to manufacture irregularities. Election deniers still walk the halls of Congress. And among too many Americans, demagogues diminish trust in elections.

That is why Congress should enact baseline national standards. Clear, pro-voter rules will bolster trust and enhance participation. Congress can modernize the system, drawing on best practices from around the country. Encouragingly, the Freedom to Vote Act will carry the designation of S. 1 and H.R. 11 (the number carried by the first bill introduced by the minority party). Congressional leaders are making it clear: democracy reform remains a central goal.

This reform didn’t pass last year — isn’t it futile to try again?

History teaches otherwise. Meaningful voting rights legislation failed in 1957 and 1960. It should have been included in the 1964 Civil Rights Act but was not. (Lyndon Johnson told Martin Luther King Jr. that voting rights legislation would solve “70 percent of your problems.”) It wasn’t until the Bloody Sunday massacre galvanized the American public that the Voting Rights Act finally crossed the finish line.

We are in a great fight for the future of American democracy. The Freedom to Vote Act

[link removed]

again flies high a flag with bold colors.





An Anti-Voter Voting Bill

Last week, House Republicans reintroduced the American Confidence in Elections Act, a bill that would reduce voting access, undercut impartial election administration, and remove campaign finance rules. The few positive provisions it contains still fall dramatically short of addressing the threats to our democracy, such as election denial and the wave of restrictive voting laws. If Congress truly wants to protect American elections, Maya Efrati and Owen Bacskai write, it should pass the Freedom to Vote Act instead. Read more

[link removed]

Shoring Up Supreme Court Ethics

Following a string of ethics scandals involving Supreme Court justices, the Senate Judiciary Committee will consider a bill on Thursday that would guard against corruption on the Court. Unlike what some opponents claim, modest reforms such as increasing disclosure requirements and imposing a binding code of conduct for the justices are well within the scope of Congress’s authority. Martha Kinsella reviews the long history of congressional regulation of ethics rules for the judiciary branch and why they need updating. READ MORE

[link removed]

Iowa’s Volatile History of Reproductive Rights

A sharply divided Iowa Supreme Court recently declined to review its 2019 decision blocking a six-week abortion ban. The justices clashed over how to grapple with the old ruling in light of the loss of federal abortion rights. This week, a lower Iowa court blocked a newly passed ban, which could also end up at the state’s high court. Harry Black writes in State Court Report that we can expect similarly heated debates as more state courts are forced to reassess the abortion rulings they issued before the fall of Roe v. Wade. Read more

[link removed]

Past, Present, and Future of the Voting Rights Act

The Voting Rights Act of 1965 is a signature achievement of the civil rights era. It opened the door for equal political opportunities for communities of color and established crucial safeguards against discriminatory election laws and procedures. But over the last decade, the Supreme Court severely weakened the law. A new Brennan Center explainer lays out the historical benefits of the Voting Rights Act, how it has been eviscerated by conservative justices, and how it should be strengthened. READ MORE

[link removed]





News

Elizabeth Goitein on abuse of emergency powers // Newsweek

[link removed]

Gowri Ramachandran on the court order limiting government contact with social media companies // CNN

[link removed]

Hernandez Stroud on New York City’s failure to improve jail conditions // New York Times

[link removed]

Eliza Sweren-Becker on the current state of voting rights // The 19th

[link removed]

Daniel Weiner on a presidential candidate’s unorthodox approach to campaign fundraising // CNBC

[link removed]

Feedback on this newsletter? Email us at [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]







[link removed]

Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law

120 Broadway, Suite 1750 New York, NY 10271

646-292-8310

tel:646-292-8310

[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

Support Brennan Center

[link removed]

Want to change how you receive these emails or unsubscribe? Click here

[link removed]

to update your preferences.

[link removed]

[link removed]

[link removed]

[link removed]

[link removed]

[link removed]