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鈥攁n agency that Congress specifically established to be bipartisan and independent鈥攖o 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 51品茶 and co-counsel filed a lawsuit to block the Executive Order as an unconstitutional power grab.
Status: Ongoing
View Case
Learn About Voting Rights
Featured
U.S. Supreme Court
Aug 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
Jul 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鈥檚 elimination a preexisting protection for voters鈥攏amely, 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.
Georgia Supreme Court
Jun 2025
Voting Rights
Eternal Vigilance Action, Inc. v. Georgia
The 51品茶 and 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鈥檚 decision permanently blocking the rule requiring hand counting of ballots at polling places before tabulation 鈥� a process widely criticized for risking delays, ballot spoliation, and voter disenfranchisement.
U.S. Supreme Court
May 2025
Voting Rights
Racial Justice
Allen v. Milligan
Whether Alabama鈥檚 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.
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鈥檚 2022 congressional redistricting plan, which legislators admit was drawn to entrench a 6-1 Republican majority in the state鈥檚 federal delegation. Plaintiff the League of Women Voters of South Carolina has asked the state鈥檚 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鈥擲B 1 for short鈥攖hat 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
156 Voting Rights Cases
Kentucky Supreme Court
Nov 2023
Voting Rights
Commonwealth of Kentucky v. Graham (Amicus)
State legislatures are responsible for creating state legislative and U.S. congressional districts. In 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court held in Rucho v. Common Cause that federal courts have no authority to review claims that states have sorted voters along partisan lines to favor one political party over others. However, challenges to partisan gerrymandering continue in many state courts, and this case involves one such constitutional challenge in Kentucky.
Explore case
Kentucky Supreme Court
Nov 2023
Voting Rights
Commonwealth of Kentucky v. Graham (Amicus)
State legislatures are responsible for creating state legislative and U.S. congressional districts. In 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court held in Rucho v. Common Cause that federal courts have no authority to review claims that states have sorted voters along partisan lines to favor one political party over others. However, challenges to partisan gerrymandering continue in many state courts, and this case involves one such constitutional challenge in Kentucky.
Kansas
Sep 2023
Voting Rights
VoteAmerica v. Schwab (Amicus)
Civic engagement organizations play a critical role in promoting the right to vote, including by helping people register to vote. Kansas passed a law restricting those civic engagement efforts, prohibiting organizations from sending pre-filled applications for mail ballots to voters. The Kansas law is part of a nationwide trend of restricting the right to vote by imposing burdens on civic engagement organizations.
Explore case
Kansas
Sep 2023
Voting Rights
VoteAmerica v. Schwab (Amicus)
Civic engagement organizations play a critical role in promoting the right to vote, including by helping people register to vote. Kansas passed a law restricting those civic engagement efforts, prohibiting organizations from sending pre-filled applications for mail ballots to voters. The Kansas law is part of a nationwide trend of restricting the right to vote by imposing burdens on civic engagement organizations.
Ohio Supreme Court
Sep 2023
Voting Rights
League of Women Voters of Ohio v. DeWine (Congressional Challenge)
On November 30, 2021, the 51品茶 and co-counsel filed a lawsuit in the Ohio Supreme Court on behalf of the League of Women Voters of Ohio (LWVO), A. Philip Randolph Institute of Ohio, and several individuals. The suit challenged Ohio鈥檚 newly-drawn congressional map.
Explore case
Ohio Supreme Court
Sep 2023
Voting Rights
League of Women Voters of Ohio v. DeWine (Congressional Challenge)
On November 30, 2021, the 51品茶 and co-counsel filed a lawsuit in the Ohio Supreme Court on behalf of the League of Women Voters of Ohio (LWVO), A. Philip Randolph Institute of Ohio, and several individuals. The suit challenged Ohio鈥檚 newly-drawn congressional map.
Florida
Jul 2023
Voting Rights
League of Women Voters of Florida v. Byrd
Florida鈥檚 statewide uniform voter registration application does not include information specifying voter eligibility requirements for Floridians with past convictions, creating confusion and putting people in danger of criminal penalties. This lack of information violates the National Voter Registration Act of 1993, which requires states to inform applicants of eligibility requirements on voter registration forms.
Explore case
Florida
Jul 2023
Voting Rights
League of Women Voters of Florida v. Byrd
Florida鈥檚 statewide uniform voter registration application does not include information specifying voter eligibility requirements for Floridians with past convictions, creating confusion and putting people in danger of criminal penalties. This lack of information violates the National Voter Registration Act of 1993, which requires states to inform applicants of eligibility requirements on voter registration forms.
Arizona Supreme Court
Jun 2023
Voting Rights
AZ Petition Partners v. Thompson (Amicus)
Explore case
Arizona Supreme Court
Jun 2023
Voting Rights