Utah
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 state view: events recorded for Utah, then national events that apply here. See the national timeline.
In Utah
2026
-
Federal judge dismisses the Justice Department's suit for Utah's full voter registration list
On October 23, 2026, Judge David Barlow of the U.S. District Court for the District of Utah granted the motions to dismiss filed by Lieutenant Governor Deidre Henderson, the NAACP and its Tri-State Conference of Idaho, Nevada, and Utah, and the League of Women Voters of Utah in United States v. Henderson (No. 2:26-cv-00166), and denied the Attorney General's motion to compel production of election records under the Civil Rights Act of 1960. The court held that Utah's statewide voter registration list does not fall within the scope of Title III of that Act and dismissed the complaint with prejudice, writing that leave to amend "would be futile." Judgment closing the case was entered the same day.
- United States v. Henderson, No. 2:26-cv-00166 (D. Utah), Memorandum Decision and Order, October 23, 2026 (Doc. 68) ↗
- Docket, United States v. Henderson, No. 2:26-cv-00166 (D. Utah), entries 68 and 69 (October 23, 2026) ↗
Source last checked Oct 24, 2026
-
Utah County clerk says ID notices were sent in error to some voters who did not need to send ID
KSL reports that the Utah County Clerk's Office sent about 6,144 notices telling voters to include a copy of their ID with their mail ballot or it would be rejected, and that at least 71 went to people who had voted before, plus an unknown number of first-time voters already verified, according to County Clerk Aaron Davidson, who called it a clerical error. On Friday, October 23, 2026, the office issued a clarification: "Unfortunately, this notice was also sent to some voters who did not need to provide identification." KSL reports that Davidson said ballots will not be rejected for voters who have already verified their identity, and that the state elections office received a voter complaint on Monday.
- Some Utah County voters incorrectly received notice telling them to include copy of ID with ballot (October 2026) ↗ News report, KSL
Source last checked Oct 24, 2026
-
Justice Department tells Utah it will send election monitors on November 3
The Deseret News reported that the Justice Department notified Lieutenant Governor Deidre Henderson on Wednesday, October 21, 2026 that it would send election monitors to some Utah jurisdictions for the November 3 election, and that Henderson said at least one is expected in Salt Lake County. KSL reported that the department's notice said monitors would go to "one or more jurisdictions" in Utah, and that Henderson said the monitors must follow state poll-watcher laws, will identify themselves to poll workers, will not approach voters or carry weapons, and may not interfere with the election. KSL reported that the lieutenant governor's office said the department sent observers to San Juan County in 2016, 2018, 2022 and 2024.
- Utah voters express confidence in elections as DOJ prepares to send monitors (Oct. 23, 2026) ↗ News report, Deseret News
- DOJ to send election monitors to Utah, lieutenant governor says (Oct. 22, 2026) ↗ News report, KSL
Source last checked Oct 23, 2026
-
Justice Department sues Utah over its full voter registration list
On February 26, 2026, the United States filed United States v. Henderson (D. Utah, No. 2:26-cv-166) against Lieutenant Governor Deidre Henderson, Utah's chief election officer, under Title III of the Civil Rights Act of 1960, which requires election officials to retain voter registration records and lets the Attorney General demand them in writing. The complaint says the action arises from the Attorney General's investigation into Utah's compliance with the National Voter Registration Act and the Help America Vote Act. KUTV reported that Utah had refused to provide its full statewide voter registration list and that, in a September 14, 2026 interview, Henderson said she would not back down from the legal fight, arguing the federal government lacks the authority to obtain unredacted personal information about Utah voters.
- Lt. Gov. Deidre Henderson won't back down in DOJ fight over voter data ↗ News report, KUTV
- United States v. Henderson, D. Utah No. 2:26-cv-166, Complaint, February 26, 2026 (Doc. 1) ↗
Source last checked Oct 24, 2026
-
Federal three-judge panel declines to block Utah's court-ordered congressional map
On February 23, 2026, in Powers Gardner v. Henderson (D. Utah, No. 2:26-cv-84), a three-judge district court convened by the Tenth Circuit (Circuit Judge Tymkovich and District Judges Shelby and Teeter) denied a preliminary injunction sought by Utah voters and elected officials, including Representatives Celeste Maloy and Burgess Owens, against use of the state district court's congressional map. The court wrote: "Because we conclude Plaintiffs have failed to demonstrate a likelihood of success on the merits, and because the Purcell principle counsels this court not to enjoin a state's election laws in the period close to an election, we DENY Plaintiffs' preliminary injunction motion." KSL reported that two judges cited the principle, writing that "an active primary is ongoing." The plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed the case in July 2026 and the court dismissed it on July 8, 2026.
- Federal court joins Utah Supreme Court in declining to block Utah's new congressional map ↗ News report, KSL
- Powers Gardner v. Henderson, D. Utah No. 2:26-cv-84, Memorandum Decision and Order, February 23, 2026 (Doc. 99) ↗
- Powers Gardner v. Henderson, D. Utah No. 2:26-cv-84, Order Dismissing Case, July 8, 2026 (Doc. 116) ↗
Source last checked Oct 21, 2026
-
Utah Supreme Court dismisses the Legislature's redistricting appeal, leaving the court-ordered map in place
KUER reported that on February 20, 2026 a three-justice panel of the Utah Supreme Court dismissed the Legislature's appeal of the August 2025 ruling, writing that the way lawmakers appealed was "improper and we lack jurisdiction." The justices did not decide whether the district court's ruling was right, and dismissed the request to keep using the 2021 map as moot.
- Utah Supreme Court dismisses lawmakers' appeal to stop the new congressional map ↗ News report, KUER
- Powers Gardner v. Henderson, D. Utah No. 2:26-cv-84, Memorandum Decision and Order, February 23, 2026 (Doc. 99), footnote 15 recording the Utah Supreme Court's February 20, 2026 dismissal ↗
Source last checked Oct 21, 2026
-
Utah district court certifies its Proposition 4 rulings as final under Rule 54(b)
On January 6, 2026, Third District Judge Dianna Gibson certified as final, under Utah Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b), her August 25, 2025 order and her September 6, 2025 amended ruling and order concerning H.B. 2004 (the 2021 congressional map) and Proposition 4, and entered judgment for the League of Women Voters of Utah and the other plaintiffs. The order says remedial proceedings on Count V and other pending claims "remain ongoing."
Source last checked Oct 21, 2026
2025
-
Judge Gibson rejects the Legislature's Map C and orders the plaintiffs' Map 1 for 2026
In a ruling and order dated November 10, 2025 in League of Women Voters of Utah v. Utah State Legislature (Third District Court, No. 220901712), Judge Dianna Gibson found that the Legislature's remedial congressional map, "Map C" enacted in S.B. 1012, "does not comply with Utah law," that it was "drawn with partisan political data on display," and that it was "drawn with the purpose to favor Republicans." She granted a preliminary injunction against enforcing S.B. 1011 and S.B. 1012 and adopted the plaintiffs' "Map 1" for Utah's congressional elections. KUER reported that Map 1 creates a district centered on Salt Lake County.
- Utah judge approves new congressional map ahead of 2026 elections ↗ News report, KUTV
- Utah got a new congressional map. The reactions have been swift and pointed ↗ News report, KUER
- League of Women Voters of Utah v. Utah State Legislature, Third Judicial District Court No. 220901712, Ruling and Order, November 10, 2025 (copy filed as Exhibit 4, Doc. 17-4, in Powers Gardner v. Henderson, D. Utah) ↗
Source last checked Oct 22, 2026
-
Utah Supreme Court denies the Legislature's emergency petition over the remedial process
On September 15, 2025 the Utah Supreme Court wrote, "we deny the petition for extraordinary relief" filed by the Legislature, which had challenged the district court's denial of a stay of its injunction against the 2021 congressional map during the remedial process. The court said the Lieutenant Governor had indicated a new map must be in place by November 10, 2025.
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
-
District court rules Proposition 4 was unconstitutionally repealed and enjoins the 2021 congressional map
The Utah Supreme Court wrote that in late August 2025 the district court ruled (the opinion elsewhere refers to the court's "August 25 order") that Proposition 4 was "a constitutionally protected exercise of Utahns' right to reform their government," that it had been unconstitutionally repealed and replaced by Senate Bill 200, and enjoined the congressional map in place since 2021 because it violated the redistricting reforms Utahns enacted.
Source last checked Oct 22, 2026
-
San Juan County settlement on Navajo voting access extended through 2028
The ACLU of Utah announced on April 24, 2025 an extension of its settlement with San Juan County, set to expire after the November 2024 election, so that it remains in effect through the 2028 election cycle. The parties filed a Second Revised Settlement Agreement with the federal court on April 22, 2025 (D. Utah, No. 2:16-cv-154, Doc. 222-1); it provides that the county will "continue through the 2028 general election to open three primary and general election day Language Assistance Locations and polling places," and addresses in-person voting and Navajo-language assistance. The court docket records an order from Judge Jill N. Parrish regarding the agreement on June 16, 2025.
- Settlement Extension Ensures Voting Access For San Juan County Voters Through 2028 ↗ News report, ACLU of Utah (counsel for the plaintiffs)
- Navajo Nation Human Rights Commission v. San Juan County, D. Utah No. 2:16-cv-154, Second Revised Settlement Agreement (Doc. 222-1) ↗
- Navajo Nation Human Rights Commission v. San Juan County, docket (Doc. 223, June 16, 2025) ↗
Source last checked Oct 21, 2026
-
Governor signs HB 300, ending automatic mail ballots for all voters starting in 2029
The Utah Legislature's record for H.B. 300 (2025), "Amendments to Election Law," shows it passed the House on February 25, 2025, was amended and passed by the Senate on March 6, 2025, with the House concurring that day, and was signed by the Governor on March 26, 2025. The bill's summary says that, beginning in 2029, "a voter will not receive a ballot by mail unless the voter requests to receive a ballot by mail," that a request lasts eight years unless the voter takes certain action, and that a mail voter with a Utah driver license or state identification card must put the last four digits of its number on the return envelope, with the last four digits of a Social Security number as an alternative and signature comparison permitted until 2029. The Salt Lake Tribune reported on March 26, 2025 that Governor Spencer Cox signed the bill and that it ends Utah's universal vote-by-mail system.
- Utah Gov. Cox signs away the state's popular universal vote-by-mail election system, requiring opting in ↗ News report, The Salt Lake Tribune
- Utah Legislature: H.B. 300 (2025 General Session), bill status and summary ↗
Source last checked Oct 21, 2026
2024
-
Utah Supreme Court explains its ruling voiding Amendment D, a proposal to let the Legislature repeal initiatives
On October 24, 2024, in League of Women Voters of Utah v. Utah State Legislature, 2024 UT 40 (No. 20240965), the Utah Supreme Court issued its opinion affirming the district court's order that kept Amendment D off the 2024 ballot, writing that the constitution requires that "constitutional amendments be submitted to voters in the way mandated by our constitution." The opinion describes the ballot title, which said Amendment D would "strengthen the initiative process by . . . [c]larifying the voters and legislative bodies' ability to amend laws," and says the Legislature proposed the amendment in an emergency special session after the court's July 11, 2024 decision in League of Women Voters I. The Salt Lake Tribune reported that the opinion was unanimous and that the court had announced its ruling in September.
- Amendment D ballot language would have misled voters, Utah Supreme Court says in full ruling ↗ News report, The Salt Lake Tribune
- Utah Supreme Court to decide whether Amendment D will stay voided or be revived ↗ News report, KPCW / Utah News Dispatch
- League of Women Voters of Utah v. Utah State Legislature, 2024 UT 40 (Utah, October 24, 2024) ↗
Source last checked Oct 22, 2026
-
Utah Supreme Court holds voter-passed government-reform initiatives are protected from unfettered legislative repeal
In League of Women Voters of Utah v. Utah State Legislature, decided July 11, 2024, the Utah Supreme Court wrote: "we hold that when Utahns exercise their right to reform the government through a citizen initiative, their exercise of these rights is protected from government infringement," meaning such initiatives are "constitutionally protected from unfettered legislative amendment, repeal, or replacement." The ruling concerned the Legislature's repeal and replacement of Proposition 4.
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
2021
-
Federal determination requires election materials for the Hispanic language group in Salt Lake County, Utah
The Director of the Census Bureau's notice, published in the Federal Register on December 8, 2021 (86 FR 69611), lists Salt Lake County, Utah, as covered by Section 203 of the Voting Rights Act for this language minority group: Hispanic. The notice says covered jurisdictions have a legal obligation to provide the minority language assistance that Section 203 prescribes; its table is titled bilingual election materials for voting rights.
- Federal Register notice, Voting Rights Act determinations under Section 203 (86 FR 69611, December 8, 2021) ↗
- Census Bureau Section 203 determination public file, 2021 ↗
Source last checked Oct 24, 2026
-
Federal determination requires election materials for 2 language groups in San Juan County, Utah
The Director of the Census Bureau's notice, published in the Federal Register on December 8, 2021 (86 FR 69611), lists San Juan County, Utah, as covered by Section 203 of the Voting Rights Act for these language minority groups: Navajo; Ute. The notice says covered jurisdictions have a legal obligation to provide the minority language assistance that Section 203 prescribes; its table is titled bilingual election materials for voting rights.
- Federal Register notice, Voting Rights Act determinations under Section 203 (86 FR 69611, December 8, 2021) ↗
- Census Bureau Section 203 determination public file, 2021 ↗
Source last checked Oct 24, 2026
-
Legislature adopts a congressional map that divides Salt Lake County among four districts
The Utah Supreme Court described the Legislative Redistricting Committee as releasing its congressional map on November 5, 2021, with a figure showing Salt Lake County "divided in four pieces," according to the plaintiffs' allegations. In 2025 the court referred to "the Congressional Map that has been in place in Utah since 2021."
- League of Women Voters of Utah v. Utah State Legislature, No. 20220991 (Utah July 11, 2024) ↗
- League of Women Voters of Utah v. Utah State Legislature (Utah Sept. 15, 2025), order on petition for extraordinary relief ↗
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
2020
-
Legislature passes Senate Bill 200, repealing and replacing Proposition 4
The Utah Supreme Court wrote that during the 2020 General Session the Legislature passed Senate Bill 200, which repealed the voter-enacted initiative and replaced it with a new law. The plaintiffs in the later suit alleged that S.B. 200 removed "the ban on partisan gerrymandering" for maps the Legislature creates and weakened the independent commission's role.
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
Nationwide
2026
-
Democratic plaintiffs ask for fast-tracked discovery in their suit over federal pressure on election officials
On October 23, 2026, the plaintiffs in DSCC v. Trump (No. 1:26-cv-03674-JEB, U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia) filed a motion for expedited discovery. The plaintiffs are the DSCC, the DCCC, the Democratic Governors Association, Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer, House Minority Leader Hakeem S. Jeffries, the Nevada State Democratic Party and Erick Jose Jimenez. The motion asks for all non-privileged communications the defendants have sent since July 1, 2026 to state or local election officials demanding or requesting that they remove specific registered voters from statewide lists, refuse ballots to specific voters, or set aside or not count ballots returned by specific voters, plus answers to interrogatories. It says the plaintiffs are "seriously contemplating" a request for emergency relief before the November 3 election, and cites an October 21, 2026 order allowing narrow expedited discovery in NAACP v. DHS in the same court.
Source last checked Oct 24, 2026
-
Federal judge bars Homeland Security election field operations aimed at people believed to be citizens in nine states
On October 21, 2026, Judge Araceli Martínez-Olguín of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California granted a preliminary injunction in California Nurses Association v. Mullin (No. 4:26-cv-10680), a suit by the California Nurses Association, National Nurses United, the City and County of San Francisco, the County of Santa Clara and the Voto Latino Foundation. The order says that in August 2026 the Department of Homeland Security started an "Unlawful Voter Initiative" that had Citizenship and Immigration Services build lists of people to investigate, and that an August 31 guidance told agents to prioritize field questioning about voter eligibility in California, Connecticut, Georgia, Missouri, Nevada, New York, Pennsylvania, Washington and Wisconsin. The court enjoined the department from election-related field operations and interviews in those nine states that involve people it knows, suspects or should reasonably suspect are U.S. citizens, and from field operations there based wholly on records from its voter eligibility matching. The order runs until polls close on November 3, 2026, and was stayed until 5 p.m. on October 23, 2026.
Source last checked Oct 24, 2026
-
Justice Department begins notifying counties it wants to monitor on Election Day 2026
NPR reported on October 21, 2026 that the Justice Department began notifying counties it wants to monitor on Election Day starting Tuesday, October 20. NPR confirmed notices to Adams County, Colorado; seven counties in Texas; King County, Washington; Miami-Dade County, Florida; and Hennepin and Ramsey counties in Minnesota. NPR reports that state officials were at first not notified at the same time as counties, and that a department spokesperson said it prioritizes places with competitive elections and would monitor Adams County because it is covered by Section 203 of the Voting Rights Act. Colorado's Secretary of State's office told NPR it was considering how to respond, since state rules require observers to have its permission unless a court orders otherwise.
- The Justice Department begins notifying counties where it wants to monitor elections ↗ News report, NPR
Source last checked Oct 22, 2026
-
Appeals in the Massachusetts Executive Order 14399 and Postal Service cases are voluntarily dismissed
On October 15, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit entered judgment in Nos. 26-1987, 26-1988, 26-1989 and 26-1991, appeals in State of California v. United States Postal Service and League of Women Voters of Massachusetts v. Trump. Upon the appellants' unopposed motions, the court ordered "that these appeals be voluntarily dismissed" under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 42(b)(2), with the mandate to issue forthwith. The judgment was entered on the district court docket on October 16, 2026.
Source last checked Oct 24, 2026
-
Federal court vacates Justice Department voter-roll policy in Common Cause v. Department of Justice
On October 9, 2026, Judge Sparkle Sooknanan of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia granted summary judgment to the plaintiffs, who challenged a Civil Rights Division policy of demanding state voter registration lists and urging removals. The opinion says "The Court therefore sets aside and vacates the challenged policy under the Administrative Procedure Act." The Justice Department argued it has statutory authority for the policy.
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
-
Democratic leaders and party committees sue to bar federal orders removing voters or holding back ballots
The Associated Press reported on October 21, 2026 that Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer, House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and the Democratic Governors Association sued in federal court in Washington (the AP says the suit was filed Tuesday, October 20). The suit names President Trump, the Justice Department, Attorney General Todd Blanche, the Department of Homeland Security and Secretary Markwayne Mullin. It asks for an order barring the administration from removing legally registered voters from statewide voter lists or denying ballots to them, and a ruling that the administration illegally threatened state election officials with prosecution. It cites the Justice Department's suit over California mail ballots. The AP reports the case was assigned to Chief Judge James Boasberg and that the Justice Department said its actions are grounded in law.
- Democrats sue to block Trump administration from usurping states' authority to administer elections (AP, Oct. 21, 2026) ↗ News report, Associated Press (via WKMG)
- "Democratic-Aligned Groups Sue Over Federal Crackdown on Voting" (quoting The New York Times) ↗ News report, Election Law Blog
- Docket, DSCC v. Trump, No. 1:26-cv-03674 (D.D.C., filed October 20, 2026) ↗
Source last checked Oct 24, 2026
-
Supreme Court grants stay in Department of Homeland Security v. League of Women Voters, on voter citizenship checks
On September 25, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court, in a per curiam order on an application for stay, granted the government's request in a case about the modified SAVE program, which lets state and local agencies check the citizenship status of registered voters against Social Security Administration records. The Court said it was "likely to reverse the District Court's holding that the federal defendants violated the Social Security Act, the Privacy Act, and the APA." The order says that Executive Order 14248 directed the Department of Homeland Security to put new systems in place for that purpose.
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
-
Civil rights and labor groups sue over possible federal immigration agents near polling places
On September 18, 2026, a coalition of nine civil rights and union groups sued in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia to prevent the deployment of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents to polling locations in November. States Newsroom reported it as the second such suit that month. The groups argue the policy violates the federal law that bars "armed men" at election sites and the Voting Rights Act's bar on intimidation. A Justice Department spokesperson said: "The DOJ has never said it would send federal law enforcement to polling locations." A Homeland Security spokesperson said ICE was not planning operations that targeted polling locations. No ruling is recorded here.
- U.S. District Court, D.D.C.: NAACP v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security, No. 1:26-cv-03263, Complaint (Doc. 1, filed September 18, 2026; CourtListener copy) ↗
- A second lawsuit challenges plans to put ICE agents near polling places (September 21, 2026) ↗ News report, Government Executive (States Newsroom)
Source last checked Oct 21, 2026
-
Federal court in Washington enjoins the Postal Service ballot mail rule
On September 13, 2026, Judge Carl Nichols of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia granted preliminary injunctions against the Postal Service's final ballot-mail rule in three consolidated cases. The opinion says "no statute grants the Postal Service the power to issue key parts of the Rule" and that plaintiffs are likely to succeed on their claim that the rule was ultra vires.
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
-
Census Bureau proposes residence criteria for the 2030 census that would exclude some noncitizens from the apportionment count
On September 10, 2026 the Census Bureau, an agency of the Department of Commerce, published a proposed rule in the Federal Register (91 FR 57524, Docket No. 260903-0005, RIN 0607-AA75) that would add two new parts to the Code of Federal Regulations: residence criteria for the decennial census, and standards and restrictions for demographic questions on the census questionnaire. On residence, the notice states that "the Census Bureau proposes to include lawful permanent residents within the apportionment base, while excluding from the apportionment base illegal aliens and aliens whose legal status is less durable and indefinite in length than lawful permanent resident status," and says it is considering using administrative records to determine legal status. The comment period, first set to end October 13, 2026, was extended to November 2, 2026 by a notice published October 5, 2026. Al Jazeera and CNBC reported on the proposal, and CNBC reported that opponents expect litigation.
- Decennial Census of the Population of Americans; Proposed Residence Criteria and Proposed Regulations for Demographic Questions, 91 Fed. Reg. 57524 (Sept. 10, 2026) (GovInfo) ↗
- Same proposed rule, extension of comment period, 91 Fed. Reg. 63207 (Oct. 5, 2026) (GovInfo) ↗
- Trump administration proposes excluding certain immigrants from US census (September 10, 2026) ↗ News report, Al Jazeera
- CNBC report on the proposed 2030 census rule (October 13, 2026) ↗ News report, CNBC
Source last checked Oct 22, 2026
-
Latino and voting groups and the City of Denver sue over armed immigration agents at polling places
On September 10, 2026, the League of United Latin American Citizens, Common Cause, Common Cause Education Fund, UnidosUS and the City and County of Denver, Colorado filed a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (No. 1:26-cv-03157) against the Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement and their leaders. The complaint alleges that the Homeland Security Secretary's statements of September 1, 2026 set a policy of authorizing armed Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers to go to polling places, which the plaintiffs say violates 18 U.S.C. § 592, the law that bars federal officials from keeping "any troops or armed men at any place where a general or special election is held" except to repel armed enemies of the United States. No ruling is recorded in this entry.
- Complaint, League of United Latin American Citizens v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security, No. 1:26-cv-03157 (D.D.C. filed Sept. 10, 2026) (CourtListener RECAP copy) ↗
- Docket, No. 1:26-cv-03157 (D.D.C.) (CourtListener) ↗
Source last checked Oct 21, 2026
-
First Circuit refuses to stay the Massachusetts preliminary injunction against parts of the Postal Service ballot-mail rule
On September 4, 2026, Judge Indira Talwani of the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts entered a memorandum and order granting the plaintiffs' motions for a preliminary injunction in League of Women Voters of Massachusetts v. Trump and the related states' case (Nos. 1:26-cv-11549 and 1:26-cv-13917), and the federal defendants and twelve intervening states appealed the same day. On September 10, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit (Nos. 26-2029 to 26-2032) denied the motions for a stay. Its order says the district court concluded the final rule was likely unconstitutional and found it would be impossible for states to comply in the time left before November 3, and that the appellants "have failed to meet their burden for disturbing any aspect of the district court's preliminary injunction order." The Postal Service's request for an administrative stay was denied as moot.
- League of Women Voters of Massachusetts v. Trump, 1st Cir. Nos. 26-2029 to 26-2032, order of court entered September 10, 2026 (D. Mass. Doc. 296) ↗
- Docket, League of Women Voters of Massachusetts v. Trump, No. 1:26-cv-11549 (D. Mass.), entries 285 to 287 (September 4, 2026) ↗
Source last checked Oct 24, 2026
-
Federal court in Massachusetts temporarily stays parts of the Postal Service ballot-mail rule for the 2026 election
On August 27, 2026, Judge Indira Talwani of the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts granted in part the plaintiffs' motions for a temporary restraining order in League of Women Voters of Massachusetts v. Trump (No. 1:26-cv-11549) and State of California v. United States Postal Service (No. 1:26-cv-13917). The court granted "an emergency fourteen-day stay" of listed sections of the final rule as to elections on or before November 3, 2026, including the sections making the ballot mail envelope standards and registration in the Postal Service Federal Ballot Mail Portal mandatory, and ordered that the Postal Service defendants "may take no further preparatory steps" to implement them for those elections. The motions for preliminary injunctions remained under advisement.
Source last checked Oct 24, 2026
-
Postal Service issues final rule on ballot mail for federal elections
The Postal Service's final rule "Ballot Mail for Federal Elections" was published August 26, 2026 and states that it is effective August 21, 2026. It says it responds to Executive Order 14399 and received "more than 200,000 responses" during the comment period. The rule says that, because of injunctions in two Massachusetts cases, the Postal Service "will not take actions to implement the rule specifically for the 2026 election" unless the government obtains relief from them. On September 13, 2026, a federal court in Washington granted preliminary injunctions against the rule.
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
-
Federal court in Massachusetts finds the government violated its injunction by issuing the Postal Service ballot-mail rule
On August 25, 2026, Judge Indira Talwani of the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts ruled on an emergency motion to enforce the preliminary injunction in League of Women Voters of Massachusetts v. Trump (No. 1:26-cv-11549). The order says the Postal Service completed rulemaking on Friday evening, August 21, 2026, by sending a final rule implementing Section 3 of Executive Order 14399 to the Office of the Federal Register, although the injunction barred "initiating or completing rulemaking" for the November 3, 2026 election. The court "finds that Defendants violated the court's Preliminary Injunction but imposes no remedy other than identifying the violation."
Source last checked Oct 24, 2026
-
Supreme Court stays the Massachusetts injunction against parts of Executive Order 14399 in Trump v. California
On August 24, 2026, in No. 26A124 (with No. 26A139), the Supreme Court granted the Government's application for a stay in a per curiam opinion. The Court wrote that "the Government is likely to prevail on the merits of its argument that the District Court lacked jurisdiction to enter the judgment," because the Order "imposes no obligations on the States" and the States had not shown an injury that gives them standing. The injunction entered in No. 1:26-cv-11581 (D. Mass.) is stayed pending appeal to the First Circuit and any petition for certiorari. The Court added that its ruling "does not mean that any measure taken by the Government to implement the Order will necessarily be lawful." Justices Sotomayor and Jackson filed dissents. The application in No. 26A139 was denied as moot.
Source last checked Oct 21, 2026
-
Justice Department appeals the dismissal of its District of Columbia voter-list suit
On August 17, 2026, the United States filed a notice of appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit from the August 6, 2026 memorandum opinion and order denying its motion to compel records in United States v. Evans (No. 1:25-cv-04403).
- Notice of appeal, United States v. Evans (D.D.C. Aug. 17, 2026) ↗
- CourtListener docket, United States v. Evans ↗
Source last checked Oct 24, 2026
-
Federal court in Massachusetts enjoins Postal Service implementation of Section 3 of Executive Order 14399
On August 11, 2026, Judge Indira Talwani of the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts granted a renewed motion for a preliminary injunction in League of Women Voters of Massachusetts v. Trump. As to elections on or before November 3, 2026, the court "ENJOINS the USPS's implementation of Section 3 of the EO."
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
-
Federal judge dismisses the Justice Department's suit for the District of Columbia's voter registration list
On August 6, 2026, Judge Randolph D. Moss of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia denied the United States' motion to compel in United States v. Evans (No. 1:25-cv-04403), dismissed the case, and denied the defendants' and intervenors' motions to dismiss as moot, stating that the order was a final judgment. The order refers to a memorandum opinion filed the same day. The lead defendant is Monica H. Evans, executive director of the District of Columbia Board of Elections.
- Order, United States v. Evans (D.D.C. Aug. 6, 2026) ↗
- CourtListener docket, United States v. Evans ↗
Source last checked Oct 24, 2026
-
House passes bill with a photo-ID voting requirement; Senate cloture vote fails, 53-47, on September 30, 2026
On July 22, 2026, the House passed H.R. 7008, the Stop Insider Trading Act, by 232 to 198 (Roll no. 280). Section 3 of the House-passed text is titled "Requiring voters to provide photo identification." On September 30, 2026, the Senate voted 53 to 47 on cloture on the motion to proceed, and the bill record says cloture was "not invoked" (Record Vote 253).
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
-
Supreme Court decides Watson v. Republican National Committee
On June 29, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court held that "The federal election-day statutes do not prevent Mississippi from counting absentee ballots postmarked by election day but received up to five days thereafter; nothing in the federal election-day statutes requires ballots to be received by election day."
Source last checked Oct 22, 2026
-
Federal court in Massachusetts declares parts of Executive Order 14399 void in a suit by states
On June 25, 2026, Judge Indira Talwani of the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts granted summary judgment to a group of states and the District of Columbia. The court ordered and declared that "Sections 2 and 3 of the EO are legally void as they are ultra vires and unconstitutionally violate the separation of powers, and that Section 5 of the EO is merely precatory," and enjoined agencies from implementing Sections 2 and 3 for the November 3, 2026 or any earlier federal election in the plaintiff states.
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
-
Postal Service proposes a rule on ballot mail for federal elections
On June 2, 2026, the Postal Service published a proposed rule, "Ballot Mail for Federal Elections," to amend its Domestic Mail Manual on the transmission of mail-in or absentee ballots for federal elections. The final rule says the comment period closed on July 2, 2026.
- Ballot Mail for Federal Elections (proposed rule), 91 Fed. Reg. 32915 (GovInfo) ↗
- Ballot Mail for Federal Elections (final rule), 91 Fed. Reg. 54966 (GovInfo) ↗
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
-
Federal court in Washington denies preliminary injunctions against Executive Order 14399
On May 28, 2026, Judge Carl Nichols of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia denied motions for preliminary injunctions in three consolidated cases against Executive Order 14399. On the postal-rulemaking provision the court wrote that, because the Postal Service had not yet issued a proposed rule, "Plaintiffs' claims are not ripe."
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
-
Supreme Court vacates the Eighth Circuit judgment in Turtle Mountain v. Howe and remands in light of Louisiana v. Callais
On May 18, 2026, the Supreme Court granted the petition in No. 25-253, vacated the Eighth Circuit's judgment and remanded the case for further consideration in light of Louisiana v. Callais. Justice Jackson dissented, writing that the case "presents only the question of Section 2's private enforceability, which our decision in Louisiana v. Callais ... did not address," and that she would summarily reverse. The docket records the Court's judgment as issued on June 22, 2026.
Source last checked Oct 21, 2026
-
Supreme Court decides Louisiana v. Callais
On April 29, 2026, after reargument on October 15, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court held: "Because the Voting Rights Act did not require Louisiana to create an additional majority-minority district, no compelling interest justified the State's use of race in creating SB8, and that map is an unconstitutional racial gerrymander."
Source last checked Oct 22, 2026
-
President signs Executive Order 14399 on citizenship verification and mail ballots
Executive Order 14399, "Ensuring Citizenship Verification and Integrity in Federal Elections," is dated March 31, 2026 and was published in the Federal Register on April 3, 2026. Section 2 directs the Department of Homeland Security to compile and transmit to each state a "State Citizenship List." Section 3 directs the Postmaster General to begin a rulemaking on mail-in and absentee ballots within 60 days. Courts later enjoined parts of the Postal Service rule that followed.
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
-
Justice Department's voter roll lawsuits reach 29 states and the District of Columbia
On February 26, 2026, the Justice Department announced lawsuits against Utah, Oklahoma, Kentucky, West Virginia and New Jersey over their full voter registration lists. Court outcomes in the individual suits are not recorded in this entry. The release says this "brings the Justice Department's nationwide total to 29 states and the District of Columbia."
Source last checked Oct 24, 2026
-
House passes SAVE America Act text as an amendment to S. 1383, 218-213
On February 11, 2026, the House passed S. 1383 with an amendment in the nature of a substitute, by 218 to 213 (Roll no. 69). The House-passed text is titled the "SAVE America Act." On March 17, 2026, the Senate agreed 51 to 48 to a motion to proceed to the House message on S. 1383 (Record Vote 57). On March 21, 2026, a cloture vote on a related motion was "not invoked" by 41 to 49 (Record Vote 61). The bill record lists no final Senate vote, and it did not become law.
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
-
Supreme Court decides Bost v. Illinois State Board of Elections
On January 14, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court held that "As a candidate for office, Congressman Bost has standing to challenge the rules that govern the counting of votes in his election."
Source last checked Oct 22, 2026
2025
-
Postal Service adds a Domestic Mail Manual section defining postmarks
On November 24, 2025, the Postal Service published a final rule adding section 608.11, "Postmarks and Postal Possession," to the Domestic Mail Manual, effective December 24, 2025. It says the new language "does not change any existing postal operations or postmarking practices" and is intended to improve public understanding of postmarks and the date of mailing.
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
-
Federal court permanently bars the Election Assistance Commission from implementing Section 2(a) of Executive Order 14248
On October 31, 2025, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia granted partial summary judgment to the plaintiffs and permanently enjoined the Election Assistance Commission, its commissioners and its executive director from implementing Section 2(a) of Executive Order 14248. The court wrote that "this Court holds that the President lacks the authority to direct such changes" to federal election procedures.
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
-
Justice Department announces it will monitor polling sites in six California and New Jersey counties
On October 24, 2025, the Justice Department announced that it would monitor polling sites ahead of the November 4, 2025 general election in six jurisdictions: Passaic County, New Jersey, and Kern, Riverside, Fresno, Orange and Los Angeles counties, California. The release says the Civil Rights Division would deploy personnel who would coordinate with U.S. Attorney's Offices.
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
-
Justice Department sues Oregon and Maine for statewide voter registration lists
On September 16, 2025, the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division announced lawsuits against Oregon and Maine and their secretaries of state, alleging violations of the National Voter Registration Act, the Help America Vote Act and the Civil Rights Act of 1960 by refusing to provide unredacted statewide voter registration lists and information on voter list maintenance. Court outcomes in the individual suits are not recorded in this entry.
Source last checked Oct 24, 2026
-
Supreme Court stays Eighth Circuit mandate in Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians v. Howe
On July 24, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court granted an application in No. 25A62, staying the issuance of the mandate of the Eighth Circuit in No. 23-3655 pending the filing and disposition of a petition for certiorari. Justices Thomas, Alito and Gorsuch would have denied it. The applicants wrote that "private plaintiffs can no longer enforce Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act (VRA) in the Eighth Circuit" as a result of the decision below. Later steps in the case are not recorded in this entry.
- Docket 25A62, Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians v. Howe (U.S. Supreme Court) ↗
- Application for stay, No. 25A62 (U.S. Supreme Court docket) ↗
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
-
Federal court in Massachusetts blocks parts of Executive Order 14248 in a suit by 19 states
On June 13, 2025, Judge Denise Casper of the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts granted a preliminary injunction in a suit by attorneys general of nineteen states. The court enjoined implementation of Sections 2(a), 2(d), 3(d), 7(a) and 7(b) of Executive Order 14248, and said the injunction as to Sections 2(a), 2(d) and 3(d) applies as to all states.
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
-
Eighth Circuit holds private plaintiffs cannot use Section 1983 to enforce Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act
On May 14, 2025, a divided Eighth Circuit panel in Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians v. Howe, No. 23-3655, wrote that "private plaintiffs" cannot "maintain a private right of action for alleged violations of § 2 through 42 U.S.C. § 1983." It vacated the North Dakota district court's judgment and remanded with instructions that the case be dismissed for want of a cause of action. Chief Judge Colloton dissented, writing that he would affirm the district court's judgment. The panel relied on its 2023 decision in Arkansas State Conference NAACP v. Arkansas Board of Apportionment, which held that Section 2 has no implied private right of action.
Source last checked Oct 23, 2026
-
Federal court in Washington blocks parts of Executive Order 14248
On April 24, 2025, Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia granted preliminary injunctions in three consolidated cases. The court enjoined the Election Assistance Commission from implementing Section 2(a) of Executive Order 14248 (documentary proof of citizenship on the federal voter registration form) and enjoined certain agencies from implementing Section 2(d). It denied the motions as to Sections 2(b), 7(a) and 7(b).
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
-
House passes SAVE Act, 220-208; Senate does not act
On April 10, 2025, the House passed H.R. 22, the SAVE Act, by 220 to 208 (Roll no. 102). The bill was received in the Senate the same day; the bill record lists no later action, and it did not become law.
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
-
President signs Executive Order 14248 on federal elections
Executive Order 14248, "Preserving and Protecting the Integrity of American Elections," is dated March 25, 2025 and was published in the Federal Register on March 28, 2025. Section 2 is titled "Enforcing the Citizenship Requirement for Federal Elections," Section 4 "Improving the Election Assistance Commission," and Section 7 "Compliance with Federal Law Setting the National Election Day." Courts later enjoined parts of it.
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
2024
-
Supreme Court decides Alexander v. South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP
On May 23, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court held that "The District Court's finding that race predominated in the design of District 1 in the Enacted Plan was clearly erroneous" in a challenge to South Carolina's congressional map.
Source last checked Oct 22, 2026
-
Supreme Court decides Trump v. Anderson
On March 4, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court held that "Because the Constitution makes Congress, rather than the States, responsible for enforcing Section 3 against federal officeholders and candidates, the Colorado Supreme Court erred in ordering former President Trump excluded from Colorado's 2024 Presidential primary ballot."
Source last checked Oct 23, 2026
2023
-
Supreme Court decides Moore v. Harper
On June 27, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court held that "The Elections Clause does not insulate state legislatures from the ordinary exercise of state judicial review." The case arose from a challenge to North Carolina's congressional map.
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
-
Supreme Court decides Allen v. Milligan
On June 8, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed a lower court's finding that voters had shown a reasonable likelihood of success in claiming that the congressional map Alabama adopted for its 2022 elections (HB1) violates Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. The lower court had preliminarily barred Alabama from using that map.
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
2022
-
Electoral Count Reform Act of 2022 becomes law
Division P of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 (Public Law 117-328, signed December 29, 2022) may be cited as the "Electoral Count Reform and Presidential Transition Improvement Act of 2022." Title I may be cited as the "Electoral Count Reform Act of 2022."
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
-
Senate cloture on the Freedom to Vote: John R. Lewis Act fails, 49-51
On January 19, 2022, the Senate voted 49 to 51 on cloture on the motion to concur in the House amendment to H.R. 5746, the Freedom to Vote: John R. Lewis Act, and cloture was "not invoked" (Record Vote 9). The bill record also lists a motion by Senator Schumer to appeal the ruling of the chair as "not agreed to," on the question "Shall the decision of the Chair stand as the judgement of the Senate," by 52 to 48 (Record Vote 10). The bill did not become law.
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
2021
-
Senate vote to begin debate on the Freedom to Vote Act fails, 49-51
On October 20, 2021, the Senate voted 49 to 51 on cloture on the motion to proceed to S. 2747, the Freedom to Vote Act. The bill record says cloture was "not invoked" (Record Vote 420). The bill did not become law.
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
-
House passes John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act; Senate cloture vote on November 3, 2021 is 50-49 and fails
On August 24, 2021, the House passed H.R. 4, the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act of 2021, by 219 to 212 (Roll no. 260). On November 3, 2021, a Senate vote on cloture on the motion to proceed to the companion bill, S. 4, was 50 to 49 and cloture was "not invoked" (Record Vote 459). Neither bill became law.
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
-
Census Bureau releases 2020 redistricting data for states
On August 12, 2021, the Census Bureau released the 2020 Census Redistricting Data (Public Law 94-171) Summary File, which it described as delivering data for states to begin redistricting. On September 16, 2021, it released the same data in an easier-to-use format on data.census.gov and delivered a toolkit to states.
- Census Bureau press release CB21-CN.55, August 12, 2021 ↗
- Census Bureau press release CB21-CN.63, September 16, 2021 ↗
Source last checked Oct 22, 2026
-
Supreme Court decides Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee
On July 1, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court held that "Arizona's out-of-precinct policy and HB 2023 do not violate § 2 of the VRA, and HB 2023 was not enacted with a racially discriminatory purpose." The case concerned rules on counting ballots cast in the wrong precinct and on who may collect early ballots.
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
-
Census Bureau announces 2020 Census apportionment results
On April 26, 2021, the Census Bureau announced that the 2020 Census resident population of the United States on April 1, 2020 was 331,449,281, and that Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo delivered the population counts used for apportionment of the U.S. House to the President.
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
-
For the People Act of 2021 passes the House; Senate committee discharge vote is 50-49 and the bill stalls
On March 3, 2021, the House passed H.R. 1, the For the People Act of 2021, by 220 to 210 (Roll no. 62). On June 22, 2021, the Senate voted 50 to 50 (Roll call 246) on cloture on the motion to proceed to S. 2093, the For the People Act of 2021, which required 3/5 of the Senate; the Senate roll call records the result as "Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected." On August 11, 2021, the Senate voted 50 to 49 to discharge its Rules and Administration Committee from the companion bill, S. 1 (Roll call 358). The bill records list no Senate vote on passage, and neither bill became law.
- H.R. 1 (117th Congress) bill status, GovInfo ↗
- S. 1 (117th Congress) bill status, GovInfo ↗
- U.S. Senate Roll Call Vote 117th Congress, 1st Session, Vote 246 (June 22, 2021) ↗
Source last checked Oct 22, 2026
-
Election Assistance Commission adopts Voluntary Voting System Guidelines 2.0
The Election Assistance Commission says that on February 10, 2021 its commissioners unanimously adopted version 2.0 of the Voluntary Voting System Guidelines, the specifications against which voting systems are tested. The EAC says it stopped using versions 1.0 and 1.1 to certify voting systems as of November 16, 2023, and that previously certified systems are not decertified by that change.
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
2020
-
Supreme Court denies Texas's motion to file a suit over other states' 2020 election procedures
On December 11, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court ordered in Texas v. Pennsylvania: "The State of Texas's motion for leave to file a bill of complaint is denied for lack of standing under Article III of the Constitution. Texas has not demonstrated a judicially cognizable interest in the manner in which another State conducts its elections."
Source last checked Oct 20, 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 · Back to the 2026 voting center.
