Washington's 7th Congressional District
A dated list of changes to how Americans vote: district maps, polling places and drop boxes, voting laws and rules, and courts and election officials. Each entry says who did what and when, shows what became of it, and links to the page it rests on. Attempts that failed are listed as failed. Entries that rest on a news report name the outlet.
This is the district view: events tagged to this congressional district, then events that apply across Washington, then national events. An event is tagged to a district only when its source names that congressional district. See all of Washington.
In Washington's 7th Congressional District
No events have been tagged to Washington's 7th Congressional District yet. District events are added over time. The state and national events below also apply here.
Across Washington
2008
-
Supreme Court upholds Washington's top-two primary against a facial challenge
In Washington State Grange v. Washington State Republican Party, decided March 18, 2008, the Court held: "I-872 is facially constitutional." The first top-two primary was held August 19, 2008, according to the Secretary of State.
- Washington State Grange v. Washington State Republican Party, 552 U.S. 442 (2008) ↗
- Washington Secretary of State: History of the Washington State Primary ↗
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
2003
-
Ninth Circuit rules Washington's blanket primary unconstitutional
The Secretary of State's primary history records that on September 15, 2003 the Ninth Circuit held Washington's blanket primary system unconstitutional as a violation of the parties' free association rights, and that the U.S. Supreme Court declined review on February 23, 2004.
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
Nationwide
2009
-
Supreme Court decides Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District No. One v. Holder
On June 22, 2009, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the Voting Rights Act "must be interpreted to permit all political subdivisions, including the district, to seek to bail out from the preclearance requirements," and so did not decide the constitutional question. The syllabus also says the Act "now raises serious constitutional concerns."
Source last checked Oct 23, 2026
-
Supreme Court decides Bartlett v. Strickland
On March 9, 2009, the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed a North Carolina ruling. A three-Justice opinion concluded that Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act "does not require state officials to draw election-district lines to allow a racial minority that would make up less than 50 percent of the voting-age population in the redrawn district to join with crossover voters to elect the minority's candidate of choice."
Source last checked Oct 23, 2026
2008
-
Supreme Court decides Crawford v. Marion County Election Board
On April 28, 2008, the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed the ruling upholding Indiana's photo identification law (SEA 483). Justice Stevens, joined by two other Justices, concluded that "the evidence in the record does not support a facial attack on SEA 483's validity."
Source last checked Oct 23, 2026
2006
-
Supreme Court decides Purcell v. Gonzalez
On October 20, 2006, the U.S. Supreme Court vacated a Ninth Circuit order that had blocked Arizona's new voter identification requirements before the November election. The Court said that vacating the order "shall of necessity allow the election to proceed without an injunction suspending the requirements" and expressed "no opinion on the correct disposition of the appeals."
Source last checked Oct 23, 2026
-
Supreme Court decides LULAC v. Perry
On June 28, 2006, the U.S. Supreme Court decided challenges to Texas's 2003 congressional redistricting. The Court's syllabus says "Texas' redrawing of District 23's lines amounts to vote dilution violative of § 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965."
Source last checked Oct 23, 2026
2000
-
Supreme Court decides Bush v. Gore
On December 12, 2000, the U.S. Supreme Court, in a per curiam opinion, reversed the Florida Supreme Court's order for manual recounts. The Court's syllabus says "any recount seeking to meet 3 U.S.C. § 5's December 12 'safe-harbor' date would be unconstitutional under the Equal Protection Clause."
Source last checked Oct 23, 2026
How this timeline is built
Every entry rests on at least one source that was opened and read, and that source states the date and the fact. Courts, legislatures, election offices, the Justice Department, the Census Bureau, the Federal Register and Congress.gov come first. A news report is used only when no official page states the fact, and it is labeled with the outlet's name. Encyclopedias are not used as sources. History starts in 1965 with the Voting Rights Act. County names come from the Census Bureau's 2024 Gazetteer. Congressional district numbers are those in use for the 2026 election; an event is tagged to a district only when its source names that congressional district.
When a later event changes an earlier one, such as a law later struck down, both entries are listed and point to each other. This page does not predict outcomes or say which party a change helps. U.S. House maps for 2026 · How people voted in past elections, by county · Back to the 2026 voting center.