Voting Rights
Eternal Vigilance Action, Inc. v. Georgia
The ÌÇÐÄVlogand partner organizations intervened in this case to represent the rights of voters and voting-rights organizations in a case challenging a number of rules passed by the Georgia State Election Board. We challenged the rule requiring that the number of votes cast be hand counted at the polling place prior to the tabulation of votes. In a critical victory for Georgia voters, in June 2025, the Georgia Supreme Court upheld a lower court’s decision permanently blocking the rule requiring hand counting of ballots at polling places before tabulation — a process widely criticized for risking delays, ballot spoliation, and voter disenfranchisement.
Status: Ongoing
View Case
Learn About Voting Rights
Featured
U.S. Supreme Court
May 2025

Voting Rights
Racial Justice
Allen v. Milligan
Whether Alabama’s congressional districts violate Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act because they discriminate against Black voters. We succeeded in winning a new map for 2024 elections which, for the first time, has two congressional district that provide Black voters a fair opportunity to elect candidates of their choosing despite multiple attempts by Alabama to stop us at the Supreme Court. Despite this win, Alabama is still defending its discriminatory map, and a trial was held in February 2025 to determine the map for the rest of the decade.
In May 2025, a federal court ruled that Alabama's 2023 congressional map both violates Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act and was enacted by the Alabama Legislature with racially discriminatory intent.
Washington, D.C.
Apr 2025

Voting Rights
League of Women Voters Education Fund v. Trump
On March 25, 2025, in a sweeping and unprecedented Executive Order, President Trump attempted to usurp the power to regulate federal elections from Congress and the States. Among other things, the Executive Order directs the Election Assistance Commission—an agency that Congress specifically established to be bipartisan and independent—to require voters to show a passport or other citizenship documentation in order to register to vote in federal elections. If implemented, the Executive Order would threaten the ability of millions of eligible Americans to register and vote and upend the administration of federal elections.
On behalf of leading voter registration organizations and advocacy organizations, the ÌÇÐÄVlogand co-counsel filed a lawsuit to block the Executive Order as an unconstitutional power grab.
U.S. Supreme Court
Mar 2025

Voting Rights
Callais v. Landry
Whether the congressional map Louisiana adopted to cure a Voting Rights Act violation in Robinson v. Ardoin is itself unlawful as a gerrymander.
New Hampshire
Mar 2025

Voting Rights
Coalition for Open Democracy v. Scanlan
This lawsuit challenges HB 1569, a new law that will make New Hampshire the only state to require every person to produce documentary proof of citizenship when they register to vote for both state and federal elections. It also challenges HB 1569’s elimination a preexisting protection for voters—namely, an affidavit option that allowed voters who faced surprise challenges to their eligibility at the polls to swear to their qualifications and cast a ballot. Accordingly, HB 1569 violates the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution by placing substantial burdens on New Hampshirites at all stages of the voting process, and will arbitrarily disenfranchise hundreds, if not thousands of qualified voters.
South Carolina Supreme Court
Jan 2025

Voting Rights
League of Women Voters of South Carolina v. Alexander
This case involves a state constitutional challenge to South Carolina’s 2022 congressional redistricting plan, which legislators admit was drawn to entrench a 6-1 Republican majority in the state’s federal delegation. Plaintiff the League of Women Voters of South Carolina has asked the state’s Supreme Court to conclude that the congressional map is an unlawful partisan gerrymander that violates the state constitution.
Texas
Oct 2024

Voting Rights
OCA-Greater Houston v. Paxton
Texas has growing Hispanic and Black populations that helped propel record voter turnout in the November 2020 election. The Texas Legislature responded to this increased civic participation with an omnibus election bill titled Senate Bill 1—SB 1 for short—that targeted election practices that made voting more accessible to traditionally marginalized voters like voters of color, voters with disabilities, and voters with limited English proficiency. Since 2021, SB 1 has resulted in tens of thousands of lawful votes being rejected, and it remains a threat to democracy in Texas.
All Cases
153 Voting Rights Cases

Kansas
Nov 2016
Voting Rights
Brown v. Kobach
The ÌÇÐÄVlogfiled a lawsuit challenging Kansas’ dual voter registration system, charging it violates the Kansas Constitution and state law.
The dual system prevents qualified Kansas voters from voting in state and local elections due solely to their method of registration. In mid-July, Secretary of State Kris Kobach received administrative approval of a temporary regulation aimed at formalizing this system, which a court has already declared violates state law.
Explore case
Kansas
Nov 2016

Voting Rights
Brown v. Kobach
The ÌÇÐÄVlogfiled a lawsuit challenging Kansas’ dual voter registration system, charging it violates the Kansas Constitution and state law.
The dual system prevents qualified Kansas voters from voting in state and local elections due solely to their method of registration. In mid-July, Secretary of State Kris Kobach received administrative approval of a temporary regulation aimed at formalizing this system, which a court has already declared violates state law.

Rhode Island
Sep 2016
Voting Rights
Davidson v. City of Cranston
Cranston, Rhode Island residents joined the ÌÇÐÄVlogof Rhode Island to sue the City of Cranston, charging that the 2012 redistricting plan for the City Council and School Committee violates the one person, one vote principle of the U.S. Constitution by counting incarcerated people in their prison location as if they were all residents of Cranston.
Explore case
Rhode Island
Sep 2016

Voting Rights
Davidson v. City of Cranston
Cranston, Rhode Island residents joined the ÌÇÐÄVlogof Rhode Island to sue the City of Cranston, charging that the 2012 redistricting plan for the City Council and School Committee violates the one person, one vote principle of the U.S. Constitution by counting incarcerated people in their prison location as if they were all residents of Cranston.

Court Case
Jul 2016
Voting Rights
Veasey v. Abbott
The ÌÇÐÄVlogfiled an amicus brief in Veasey v. Abbott, a case that challenges Texas’s voter ID law. The district court struck down the law, finding that the law was passed with a discriminatory purpose, creates an unconstitutional burden on the right to vote, and disproportionately burdens Latino and African-American voters.
Explore case
Court Case
Jul 2016

Voting Rights
Veasey v. Abbott
The ÌÇÐÄVlogfiled an amicus brief in Veasey v. Abbott, a case that challenges Texas’s voter ID law. The district court struck down the law, finding that the law was passed with a discriminatory purpose, creates an unconstitutional burden on the right to vote, and disproportionately burdens Latino and African-American voters.

Kansas
Jul 2016
Voting Rights
Belenky v. Kobach
On September 21, 2013 the ÌÇÐÄVlog and the ÌÇÐÄVlogof Kansas filed a lawsuit challenging Kansas' two-tiered voter registration system. The complaint charges that eligible voters are being divided into separate and unequal classes, in violation of the Kansas Constitution's equal protection guarantees.
Explore case
Kansas
Jul 2016

Voting Rights
Belenky v. Kobach
On September 21, 2013 the ÌÇÐÄVlog and the ÌÇÐÄVlogof Kansas filed a lawsuit challenging Kansas' two-tiered voter registration system. The complaint charges that eligible voters are being divided into separate and unequal classes, in violation of the Kansas Constitution's equal protection guarantees.