Trump anti-voting order draws furious pushback

New anti-voting order draws furious pushback

After President Donald Trump issued an executive order Tuesday that experts said could potentially disenfranchise millions, Democratic election officials and voting rights advocates swiftly vowed to fight it.
The greatest threat to Trump’s authoritarian dream is not the courts — it is free and fair elections, Marc wrote, adding the president's latest illegal executive order is a wake-up call for those who believe the danger of election subversion has passed.

Trump tries to kill off vote by mail

One provision from the anti-voting order looks like a bid to advance a goal that for years has been a borderline obsession for Trump: cracking down on voting by mail. It could disenfranchise millions, especially disabled, older, rural and military voters.
The order directs Attorney General Pam Bondi to “take all necessary action” against any states that count ballots received after Election Day. Currently 18 states allow mail-in and absentee ballots to be counted if they are received within varying timeframes, so long as they’re postmarked on or before Election Day.
Barbara Smith Warner, former Oregon state representative and executive director of the National Vote at Home Institute, told Democracy Docket she isn’t surprised by the order. “I would say that the pre-announcement of the Postal Service was the warning shot,” Warner said. “And in both of these situations, it continues to demonstrate that this is a power grab over things that they have no actual right to control.”

Challenge to pro-voting Michigan constitutional amendments heads to SCOTUS

Michigan GOP lawmakers asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review their ability to challenge voter-approved amendments to the state constitution that protect ballot access, claiming these initiatives undermine their authority to regulate federal elections.

The latest in Minnesota’s witness requirement challenge

Earlier this week, the Minnesota Court of Appeals ruled that the state’s requirement that absentee voters obtain the signature of a witness to cast an absentee ballot does not violate the Voting Rights Act or the Civil Rights Act. This case was brought by a pro-voting group last year.

Vet Trump’s judicial picks for their views on presidential power

The foundation of our government is checks and balances — no one branch has absolute power. That's why Trump's judicial nominees should be thoroughly questioned on their views about presidential power, Keith Thirion of Alliance for Justice argued in a new piece for Democracy Docket.

Hearings coming up tomorrow

Courts in Washington, D.C. will hold hearings in two lawsuits. One challenges the unlawful firing of inspectors general, while the other seeks to stop the Trump administration from publicizing the names of FBI agents involved in Jan. 6 and Trump's classified documents investigations.
The 9th Circuit will hear oral argument in lawsuits challenging Washington's legislative map. A lower court adopted a new map under the Voting Rights Act to better represent Latino voters. Republican intervenors appealed this decision. The court will also hear Republicans’ appeal in a separate lawsuit challenging the new map as a racial gerrymander.