Hi John,
Welcome back to The Good, The Bad, The Ugly — your go-to source for the latest in voting rights. In Maine, voters rejected a ballot measure that would have made it harder to vote. A Mississippi law on mail-in voting is being challenged in the U.S. Supreme Court, and it could impact dozens of states just in time for the 2026 elections. And the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Trump administration can block trans and nonbinary people from choosing passport sex markers that align with their gender identity.
So, buckle up as we break down the wins, the setbacks, and the urgent fights ahead in the battle for our democracy. 😉 |
😃 Good: Maine voters protected voting rights on Election Day by rejecting Question 1 that would have made it harder to vote. The measure would have created a voter ID requirement, limited the number of dropboxes, and restricted absentee ballots. If approved, this ballot measure would have made big changes to absentee voting, like prohibiting absentee ballot requests by phone or family members, ending the ongoing status for seniors and people with disabilities to automatically receive absentee ballots, and banning prepaid postage stamps on absentee ballots. 64% of voters rejected this ballot measure and protected voting rights.
😠 Bad: The U.S. Supreme Court will decide if mail-in ballots can be counted after Election Day. Mississippi allows mail-in ballots to be counted as long as they are received five business days after Election Day, but Watson v. Republican National Committee challenges their voting law, arguing that voting should take place on a single Election Day. If the Court rules against Mississippi, it could upend mail-in voting rules in dozens of states ahead of the 2026 elections.
😡 Ugly: The U.S. Supreme Court has allowed the Trump administration’s block on passport sex markers for trans and nonbinary people. The U.S. State Department changed its passport rules after a January executive order declaring the United States would “recognize two sexes, male and female,” based on birth certificates and “biological classification.” By upholding this policy, the Court’s decision leaves transgender people who obtained updated passports under the prior policy in limbo — and all transgender travelers face uncertainty. This ruling could open the door to a broader attack on transgender identification policies nationwide and make it harder for up to 3 million trans voters to update the citizenship documents they might need to register to vote.
|
