Skip to main content

Fighting Voter Suppression

We challenge all efforts and tactics that threaten our democracy and limit the ability of voters to exercise their right to vote.

Why it matters

Voting rights are under attack. In recent years, politicians in dozens of states have erected intentional barriers to our right to vote, including forcing discriminatory voter ID and proof-of-citizenship restrictions on eligible voters, reducing polling place hours in communities of color, cutting early voting opportunities and illegally purging voters from the rolls.

What we're doing

We are at the forefront of the most important federal and state voting rights cases around the country. We actively oppose discriminatory voter photo ID laws, fight against attacks voter registration process and hold lawmakers accountable when they try to institute last-minute Election Day barriers. We work year-round to combat voter suppression through advocacy, grassroots organizing, legal action and public education. Our efforts have resulted in the protection of voting rights and ballot access for millions of Americans.

Fighting Voter Suppression In Depth

The League submitted comments to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights as part of its ongoing assessment of federal enforcement of the Voting Rights Act (VRA).

 

League of Women Voters president Chris Carson issued the following statement in response to a Department of Homeland Security bill provision that would allow President Trump to dispatch Secret Service agents to polling places:

Today the U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments in the case of Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Mansky. The case is a challenge to a Minnesota statute that says that a “political badge, political button, or other political insignia may not be worn at or about the polling place on primary or election day.” 

The League filed a brief in the case, Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Mansky, which will be heard by the U.S. Supreme Court on February 28, 2018. 

In a spirited argument on Wednesday, the Supreme Court appeared deeply divided over whether Ohio may kick people off the voting rolls if they skip a few elections and fail to respond to a notice from state officials.

At the Supreme Court this morning Justices listened to arguments in Husted v. A. Philip Randolph Institute and will soon answer the question, is the right to vote use-it-or-lose-it?

I joined other voting rights advocates who braved the cold to stand outside the Supreme Court and call for an end to unlawful voter purges.

The case of League of Women Voters of North Carolina v. Rucho challenges North Carolina’s 2016 congressional redistricting plan, arguing the plan violates the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution. 

Texas Advocacy Groups to Texas Officials: Handing Over Voter Information Violates State Law

The Supreme Court case of Gill v. Whitford challenges the district maps drawn by the state legislature of Wisconsin in 2011. It is the first partisan gerrymandering challenge to make it to the Supreme Court in 13 years.

LWVUS and LWVOH submitted an amicus brief to the U.S. Supreme Court in the case of Husted v. A. Phillip Randolph Institute.