No Weapons, No Pressure, No Problem? How Public Act 26-42 Redraws Connecticut’s Electoral Landscape
October 15, 2026
By Guillem Colom
On Election Day 2024, Stamford, Connecticut, voters approaching the polls encountered more than campaign signs and voting instructions. A uniformed police officer stood at each of the city’s twenty-two polling places as Connecticut police departments prepared for heightened political animosities and potential electoral disruptions. City officials cited public safety concerns to justify the presence, but the scene also raised a more complicated question: when does security make voters feel protected, and when does it make voting feel policed?
Saving or Suppressing the Right to Vote: The Florida SAVE Act
October 15, 2026
By Megan Husi
As of September 14, 2026, the Safeguarding American Voter Eligibility Act, often referred to as the SAVE Act or SAVE America Act, has been stalled in the U.S. Senate due to Democratic opposition, though some Republican lawmakers have indicated that they will try to push the act’s key reforms through the reconciliation process. Despite Congress’s stalemate, several state legislatures, including Florida, have taken matters into their own hands and enacted laws with similar provisions.
Of Primary Concern: Idaho’s Struggle with Presidential Nomination
October 15, 2026
By Amelia Johnson
In 2023, Idaho lawmakers unintentionally eliminated the presidential primary. Three years later, the legislature is still fighting to revive it. (more…)
Accuracy Versus Access: A New (But Familiar) Challenge in Ohio
October 15, 2026
By Adam Race
Almost a decade after Husted v. A. Philip Randolph Institute, Ohio is yet again facing a legal challenge claiming it violated the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA).
The League of Women Voters of Ohio (LWVO) and the Council on American-Islamic Relations-Northern Ohio (CAIR-Ohio) challenged Ohio Senate Bill 293 (SB 293) in League of Women Voters of Ohio v. LaRose, claiming that the law violates the NVRA and the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause. The case is currently pending in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio.
Washington Expands State Voting Rights Act
October 15, 2026
By Lauren Sutherland
Washington is one of many states that responded to the weakened federal Voting Rights Act of 1965 by passing their own state-level voting rights act. The Washington Legislature passed the first version of the Washington Voting Rights Act in 2018, which outlined the procedure for plaintiffs to challenge any local government action they allege gives members of a protected class an unequal opportunity to elect candidates of their choice. The Washington Voting Rights Act has already been used to successfully challenge the Yakima County Commission’s “district-based top two primary system” and “at-large general election” system, and the Washington Voting Rights Act survived a facial constitutional challenge in 2023.
Building on those existing protections, Washington lawmakers added several key provisions to the Washington Voting Rights Act in 2026. Voting rights advocacy organizations praise these policies as significant tools to safeguard democratic participation and fight against discriminatory practices. However, local government organizations and elected officials are concerned that the updates to the Washington Voting Rights Act will create burdensome and costly bureaucracy around “routine election-related decisions.” Further, some Republican state lawmakers and local officials have objected to the Washington’s Voting Rights Act’s references to using race in redistricting, arguing it could be constitutionally problematic considering the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in Louisiana v. Callais.
Colorado: An Accurate and Accessible System
October 15, 2026
By Lyza Weisman
The right to vote is self-evident, but this isn’t always the case for members in Native American communities. The Native American Rights Fund estimated in 2024 that one in four eligible Native Americans are registered to vote. The Fund credited the issue to the deep-rooted historic mistreatment of Native Americans in the voting process. In 2024, the Fund recognized Colorado as one of four states with automatic voter registration (AVR), which is incredibly helpful in increasing Native American voter participation.
Unique Ballot Proposal Could Bring Voter ID to California
October 14, 2026
By Thomas Callahan
On Nov. 3, 2026, voters in California will cast their ballots on a variety of proposed changes to state law. One such proposal, Proposition 39, would dramatically change election law in California.
Rocky at the Top: Filling the Coming Senate Vacancy in Tennessee
October 14, 2026
By William & Mary Law Student Contributor
A senator looks in the mirror and sees a president. A governor looks in the mirror and sees a senator. And from time to time in the political past, the extraordinarily enterprising statesman has asked that magic mirror: why not both? An answer to that question may be found in a notorious historical precedent.
Virginia’s Potential State Constitutional Amendment and Voting Disenfranchisement
October 14, 2026
By William & Mary Law Student Contributor
Virginia may have the most elections of any state; however, Virginia has often been credited as being the most difficult state to vote in, especially for those convicted of a felony. During the election cycle this year, Virginians will have three amendments to vote on: (1) reproductive healthcare; (2) marriage equality; and (3) voting rights restoration for formerly incarcerated individuals. The third amendment is the most relevant to election law.
Maryland’s VRA and the Uncertain Future of State Responses to Callais
September 30, 2026
By Peter Favret
Earlier this year, in April, Maryland became one of three states to pass a new state-wide Voting Rights Act in 2026. Delaware and New Jersey also passed state voting rights acts this year. The action takes place against a backdrop of a little over a decade of Supreme Court decisions that decreased the breadth and power of the original 1965 act. Provisions that were scaled back include the preclearance provision (Section Five), which required certain “covered jurisdictions” with a history of racial discrimination to obtain advance approval from the federal government before making changes to voting procedures, and Section Two, the provision banning racially discriminatory voting practices.