New York is the latest place where state courts are protecting the rights of voters from legislators trying to consolidate power. ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌  ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌  ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌  ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌  ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌  ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌  ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌  ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌  ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌  ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌   ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌  ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌  ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌  ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌  ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌  ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌  ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌  ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌  ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌  ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌  ‌  ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌  ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌  ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌  ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ 
Donate
Brennan Center for Justice
Just three days before President Biden’s inauguration, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) texted the White House chief of staff that some fellow GOP House members wanted President Trump to declare martial law. The term “martial law” has no established definition, but it is generally understood as a power allowing the military to take over the role of civilian government in an emergency. Although there is no provision for martial law in U.S. law, there is the Insurrection Act, which allows the president to deploy the military for civilian law enforcement, permitting the military to assist civilian authorities.
The law, which dates to 1792, is dangerously vague and ripe for abuse. So when can the president invoke the Insurrection Act? And what exactly does it allow the president and military to do? A new Brennan Center explainer has answers on this antiquated law and why it needs a major overhaul.
Last week, the New York Court of Appeals struck down the state’s congressional and state senate districts. The ruling is a victory for fair maps and follows decisions from North Carolina, Ohio, and Kansas as the latest example of state courts standing up to partisan gerrymandering and filling the void left by federal courts in redistricting. As extreme gerrymanders take effect in states nationwide, it’s worth celebrating when state courts step up to become democracy’s last line of defense.
Based on a leaked draft opinion, the Supreme Court seems poised to revoke the federally guaranteed right to abortion. Such a ruling would overturn Roe v. Wade, which has been the law of the land for nearly half a century. The Supreme Court has reversed precedents before, but never to take away a fundamental right. The draft opinion raises frightening questions about where the Court may be willing to go in areas such as LGBTQ rights and voting rights.
The Brennan Center and Ms. magazine recently teamed up to publish a series covering the connections between abortion rights and democracy. Then, leading activists and academics joined a panel to discuss the intertwined attacks on democracy and reproductive rights. Watch the video and read highlights here.
Last week, the Brennan Center unveiled a Spanish-language version of our website, Brennan en español. It features research and analysis about voting rights, criminal justice, and other issues relevant to Spanish-speaking audiences. Check out the launch video, where Brennan Center staff attempt to answer one simple question: ¿cómo se dice “gerrymandering” en español?
The Department of Homeland Security, notorious for inhumane enforcement of immigration laws, also needs to reform its counterterrorism and intelligence operations. It has repeatedly targeted people of color and social justice activists, most memorably during the 2020 protests over George Floyd and Breonna Taylor’s deaths. Yet it turned a blind eye to threats of white supremacist violence, made strikingly obvious during the January 6 Capitol attack.
The department also acquires personal data in the name of monitoring security threats, a practice that endangers civil liberties. DHS’s overreach into the lives and private data of millions of Americans and its track record of bias must be subject to more robust oversight.

 
Virtual Events
 
The Independent State Legislature Theory’s Radical Threat to Democracy
Wednesday, May 11 // 1:30–2:45 p.m. ET
Under the independent state legislature theory, state legislatures would have exclusive power to make election law, unconstrained by state constitutions, state courts, state governors — and maybe even federal law. Join us for a live discussion about it with Vikram D. Amar, dean of the University of Illinois School of Law; Leah Litman, professor at the University of Michigan Law School; Carolyn Shapiro, co-director of the Institute on the Supreme Court at Illinois Tech; Kate Shaw, co-director of the Floersheimer Center for Constitutional Democracy at Cardozo Law; and moderator Wilfred Codrington III, Brennan Center fellow and professor at Brooklyn Law School. RSVP today.
 
 
RESCHEDULED: Universal Voting
Tuesday, May 17 // 6–7 p.m. ET
Twenty-six countries require participation in their elections. In 100% Democracy: The Case for Universal Voting, co-authors E.J. Dionne and Miles Rapoport argue that the United States should follow in their footsteps. After all, Americans are required to pay taxes and serve on juries. Join us for a conversation with the authors and New York City Council member Alexa Avilés about universal voting and how to implement it. RSVP today.
 

 
BRENNAN CENTER ON INSTAGRAM
A recent Brennan Center survey of local election officials found that more than three-quarters say that threats against them have increased in recent years. The federal government must act to protect them. Read more on Instagram >>
 
 

 
Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law
120 Broadway, Suite 1750 New York, NY 10271
646-292-8310 
 
Want to change how you receive these emails or unsubscribe? Click here to update your preferences.
Facebook Twitter Instagram LinkedIn YouTube Website