Skip to page content
Power & PoliticsUnited States edition
Sections
Only your five-digit ZIP code is sent. We never ask for your address.
Independent · nonpartisan
Voting history · Washington

Washington

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 Washington, then national events that apply here. See the national timeline.

Congressional districts in Washington

Choose a district to see the events tagged to it. A number after the district is how many events name it.

Kind of event
Decade

In Washington

2026

  1. Oct 30, 2026 State Polling places and drop boxes In effect

    Washington National Guard watches ballot drop boxes in seven counties before the November 3 election

    Gov. Bob Ferguson's office confirmed on October 30, 2026 that the Washington National Guard is monitoring ballot drop boxes in Snohomish, Island, King, Pierce, Thurston, Clark and Lewis counties, The Daily Herald reports. Earlier in October Ferguson wrote to every county auditor offering Guard support as an "Election Neighborhood Watch," citing letters containing white powder sent to several officials, including the secretary of state, and the 2024 fire set in a Clark County ballot box. A Snohomish County auditor's office spokesperson said the soldiers report to the auditor, are unarmed and in plain clothes, watch drop boxes in the evening and overnight, and do not empty boxes, handle ballots, interact with voters or act as law enforcement; they call 911 if they see anything concerning. The county and the governor's office declined to say how many soldiers are deployed.

    Source last checked Oct 30, 2026

  2. Oct 28, 2026 State Laws and rules Reported

    Secretary of State Hobbs declines U.S. attorneys' request to set aside ballots from more than 400 registrants

    On October 28, 2026, Washington Secretary of State Steve Hobbs answered by letter the request from the state's two U.S. attorneys that election officials set aside ballots matching their list of more than 400 people they allege are noncitizens, and declined it, KUOW reports. KUOW quotes the letter as saying, "You provide no information about how the information was collected or what sources were used," and reports that Hobbs wrote that his office had found U.S. citizens on the list and that many names on it are not registered to vote, and argued that refusing to count ballots over an unverified list would likely be unlawful.

    Related: U.S. attorneys ask Washington to set aside ballots from more than 400 registrants they say are noncitizens

    Source last checked Oct 29, 2026

  3. Oct 26, 2026 State Laws and rules Reported

    U.S. attorneys ask Washington to set aside ballots from more than 400 registrants they say are noncitizens

    On October 26, 2026, the U.S. Attorney's Offices for the Western and Eastern Districts of Washington announced that they would give the Secretary of State a list of more than 400 people who "appear to be illegally registered" and ask that their mail ballots be set aside until their citizenship can be confirmed. Acting U.S. Attorney Neil Floyd said the offices had "identified over 400 non-citizens who are registered to vote and have voted in multiple elections"; the release says many on the list are lawful permanent residents. NBC News reported that the letter gave the state 24 hours to review the list and that Secretary of State Steve Hobbs' office was reviewing it; Hobbs said the office "will only respond to requests that follow due process."

    Related: Federal court dismisses the Justice Department's voter-roll suit against Washington · Justice Department sues California over about 20,000 registrants it calls likely noncitizens · Secretary of State Hobbs declines U.S. attorneys' request to set aside ballots from more than 400 registrants · Unions, LULAC and the NAACP sue the Justice and Homeland Security departments over threats to election workers · Federal judge bars the Justice and Homeland Security departments from demanding that officials set aside ballots or threatening them with prosecution

    Source last checked Oct 27, 2026

  4. Oct 5, 2026 State Courts and officials Pending

    Supreme Court vacates Ninth Circuit judgment in light of Louisiana v. Callais

    On October 5, 2026 the Supreme Court granted the petition in Trevino v. Hobbs (No. 25-918), vacated the Ninth Circuit's judgment and remanded for further consideration in light of Louisiana v. Callais. It entered the same disposition in Garcia v. Hobbs (No. 25-901). The matter is back before the Ninth Circuit.

    Related: Ninth Circuit affirms in part and dismisses in part appeals over the Yakima Valley map · Supreme Court decides Louisiana v. Callais

    Source last checked Oct 24, 2026

  5. Sep 22, 2026 State Courts and officials Decided by a court

    Federal court dismisses the Justice Department's voter-roll suit against Washington

    On September 22, 2026 the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington granted the motions to dismiss in United States v. Hobbs (No. 3:25-cv-06078), dismissed the case with prejudice, and denied the Justice Department's motion to compel as moot. The order states: "The Court concludes that the Government's demand for voter data violates federal law."

    Related: Justice Department sues Secretary of State Hobbs for Washington's full voter file · U.S. attorneys ask Washington to set aside ballots from more than 400 registrants they say are noncitizens

    Source last checked Oct 24, 2026

  6. Mar 25, 2026 State Laws and rules Enacted

    Governor approves HB 1916 on voter registration challenges and list management

    Engrossed Substitute House Bill 1916, captioned "Voter registration--challenges and list management," passed the Senate 30-19 on March 3, 2026 and the House 58-38 on March 11, 2026 and was approved March 25, 2026 as Chapter 212, Laws of 2026, effective June 11, 2026.

    Source last checked Oct 20, 2026

  7. Mar 25, 2026 State Laws and rules Enacted

    Governor approves SB 5892 on confidential voter registration information

    Senate Bill 5892, captioned "Voter registration--confidential information," amends the public records exemption for election security information. It passed the House 57-36 on February 28, 2026 and the Senate 30-19 on March 9, 2026 and was approved March 25, 2026 as Chapter 213, Laws of 2026, effective that day.

    Source last checked Oct 20, 2026

  8. Mar 25, 2026 State Laws and rules Enacted

    Governor approves HB 1710 on compliance with the state Voting Rights Act

    Engrossed Third Substitute House Bill 1710, captioned "Washington voting rights act--compliance," defines "covered jurisdictions" by court orders, consent decrees or settlements in the previous 25 years and covered policies such as changes to method of election. It passed the Senate 30-19 on March 4, 2026 and the House 57-39 on March 11, 2026 and was approved March 25, 2026 as Chapter 211, Laws of 2026, effective June 11, 2026.

    Related: Governor approves HB 1750 on disparate-burden and vote dilution claims under the state Voting Rights Act

    Source last checked Oct 20, 2026

  9. Mar 25, 2026 State Laws and rules Enacted

    Governor approves HB 1750 on disparate-burden and vote dilution claims under the state Voting Rights Act

    Engrossed Second Substitute House Bill 1750, captioned "Washington voting rights act--voter suppression and vote dilution claims," passed the Senate 30-19 on February 28, 2026 and the House 58-38 on March 11, 2026 and was approved March 25, 2026 as Chapter 215, Laws of 2026, effective June 11, 2026.

    Related: Governor signs the Washington Voting Rights Act of 2018 · Governor approves HB 1710 on compliance with the state Voting Rights Act

    Source last checked Oct 20, 2026

  10. Jan 9, 2026 State Courts and officials Blocked by a court

    Federal judge blocks parts of Executive Order 14248 as applied to Washington and Oregon

    On January 9, 2026 U.S. District Judge John H. Chun, in a suit Washington and Oregon filed in April 2025 (No. 2:25-cv-00602, W.D. Wash.), ruled that Executive Order 14248 sections 2(a), 4(a), 4(b), 7(a) and 7(b) violate the separation of powers and permanently enjoined the named defendants from enforcing them against the two states. The provisions covered documentary proof of citizenship on federal registration forms and a requirement that mail ballots arrive by Election Day. A White House spokeswoman said the ruling was "not the final say." The government filed a notice of interlocutory appeal to the Ninth Circuit on March 10, 2026 (No. 26-1429).

    Related: President signs Executive Order 14248 on federal elections · Federal court in Massachusetts blocks parts of Executive Order 14248 in a suit by 19 states

    Source last checked Oct 21, 2026

2025

  1. Dec 2, 2025 State Courts and officials Decided by a court

    Justice Department sues Secretary of State Hobbs for Washington's full voter file

    On December 2, 2025 the Justice Department filed suit against Secretary of State Steve Hobbs, after the state declined its summer 2025 demand for the full voter file, including birth dates and driver's license or partial Social Security numbers.

    Related: Justice Department's voter roll lawsuits reach 29 states and the District of Columbia · Federal court dismisses the Justice Department's voter-roll suit against Washington

    Source last checked Oct 24, 2026

  2. Aug 27, 2025 State Courts and officials Upheld

    Ninth Circuit affirms in part and dismisses in part appeals over the Yakima Valley map

    In Palmer v. Trevino, filed August 27, 2025, the Ninth Circuit held that the intervenors lacked standing to appeal the Section 2 liability finding and the remedial map's Section 2 aspect, and affirmed in part the remedial order, ruling that a single-judge court could hear the statutory claim.

    Related: Federal court orders a remedial legislative map for the Yakima Valley · Supreme Court vacates Ninth Circuit judgment in light of Louisiana v. Callais

    Source last checked Oct 20, 2026

2024

  1. Mar 15, 2024 State Maps and lines Enacted

    Federal court orders a remedial legislative map for the Yakima Valley

    On March 15, 2024 the Soto Palmer district court ordered a new map in which the previously enacted LD 15 was reconfigured and redesignated LD 14. The Ninth Circuit's opinion says the court imposed an adjusted version of the plaintiffs' Map 3A after the commission declined to draw a remedial district.

    Related: Federal court finds Legislative District 15 violates Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act · Ninth Circuit affirms in part and dismisses in part appeals over the Yakima Valley map

    Source last checked Oct 20, 2026

2023

  1. Aug 10, 2023 State Courts and officials Decided by a court

    Federal court finds Legislative District 15 violates Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act

    On August 10, 2023 the Western District of Washington issued a Memorandum of Decision in Soto Palmer v. Hobbs, finding that Legislative District 15 had the effect of discriminating against Hispanic voters by denying them an equal right to elect candidates of their choice. Voters had sued in January 2022.

    Related: Legislature adopts the redistricting plan, including Legislative District 15 · Federal court orders a remedial legislative map for the Yakima Valley

    Source last checked Oct 20, 2026

  2. Jun 15, 2023 County Courts and officials Upheld

    Washington Supreme Court upholds the state Voting Rights Act in Portugal v. Franklin County

    On June 15, 2023 the Washington Supreme Court unanimously rejected a constitutional challenge to the Washington Voting Rights Act, in a case that arose from a settlement of Latino voters' suit over Franklin County's at-large commissioner elections. The State Court Report describes the opinion by Justice Mary Yu.

    Related: Governor signs the Washington Voting Rights Act of 2018

    Source last checked Oct 21, 2026

  3. Apr 13, 2023 State Laws and rules Enacted

    Governor approves amendments to the Washington Voting Rights Act

    Engrossed Substitute House Bill 1048, captioned "Voting rights act--various provisions," passed the House 57-38 on March 4, 2023 and the Senate 27-21 on April 5, 2023 and was approved April 13, 2023 as Chapter 56, Laws of 2023, effective January 1, 2024.

    Related: Governor signs the Washington Voting Rights Act of 2018

    Source last checked Oct 20, 2026

2022

  1. Feb 8, 2022 State Maps and lines Enacted

    Legislature adopts the redistricting plan, including Legislative District 15

    A court filing by the State records that the Commission unanimously approved a legislative map on November 16, 2021, that the Legislature made minor amendments, and that on February 8, 2022 it passed House Concurrent Resolution 4407 adopting the amended plan, which became state law.

    Related: Federal court finds Legislative District 15 violates Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act · Washington Supreme Court declines to take over redistricting after the commission tells it the deadline could not be met

    Source last checked Oct 20, 2026

2021

  1. Dec 8, 2021 County Laws and rules In effect

    Federal determination requires election materials for the Hispanic language group in Adams County, Washington

    The Director of the Census Bureau's notice, published in the Federal Register on December 8, 2021 (86 FR 69611), lists Adams County, Washington, 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.

    Related: Federal determination requires election materials for the Hispanic language group in Adams County, Washington · Federal determination requires election materials for the Hispanic language group in Adams County, Washington · Federal determination requires election materials for the Hispanic language group in Adams County, Washington

    Source last checked Oct 24, 2026

  2. Dec 8, 2021 County Laws and rules In effect

    Federal determination requires election materials for the Hispanic language group in Franklin County, Washington

    The Director of the Census Bureau's notice, published in the Federal Register on December 8, 2021 (86 FR 69611), lists Franklin County, Washington, 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.

    Related: Federal determination requires election materials for the Hispanic language group in Franklin County, Washington · Federal determination requires election materials for the Hispanic language group in Franklin County, Washington · Federal determination requires election materials for the Hispanic language group in Franklin County, Washington

    Source last checked Oct 24, 2026

  3. Dec 8, 2021 County Laws and rules In effect

    Federal determination requires election materials for 3 language groups in King County, Washington

    The Director of the Census Bureau's notice, published in the Federal Register on December 8, 2021 (86 FR 69611), lists King County, Washington, as covered by Section 203 of the Voting Rights Act for these language minority groups: Hispanic; Chinese (including Taiwanese); Vietnamese. 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.

    Related: Federal determination requires election materials for the Chinese language group in King County, Washington · Federal determination requires election materials for 2 language groups in King County, Washington · Federal determination requires election materials for 2 language groups in King County, Washington

    Source last checked Oct 24, 2026

  4. Dec 8, 2021 County Laws and rules In effect

    Federal determination requires election materials for the Hispanic language group in Yakima County, Washington

    The Director of the Census Bureau's notice, published in the Federal Register on December 8, 2021 (86 FR 69611), lists Yakima County, Washington, 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.

    Related: Federal determination requires election materials for the Hispanic language group in Yakima County, Washington · Federal determination requires election materials for the Hispanic language group in Yakima County, Washington · Federal determination requires election materials for the Hispanic language group in Yakima County, Washington

    Source last checked Oct 24, 2026

  5. Dec 3, 2021 State Maps and lines Decided by a court

    Washington Supreme Court declines to take over redistricting after the commission tells it the deadline could not be met

    On November 16, 2021 the chair of the Washington State Redistricting Commission wrote to the Washington Supreme Court that the commission had been unable to adopt a plan by its November 15 deadline and was ceding responsibility to the court; the Associated Press reported that the commission had missed the deadline. In Order No. 25700-B-676 of December 3, 2021, the court accepted the chair's sworn declaration and found that the commission voted to approve a congressional plan at 11:59:28 p.m. and a legislative plan at 11:59:47 p.m. on November 15, 2021, which met the constitutional deadline, and that it failed to transmit the plan to the legislature by the statutory deadline. The court concluded the commission "substantially complied with the statutory deadline," declined to adopt a plan itself, and returned the matter to the commission to finish its work.

    Related: Legislature adopts the redistricting plan, including Legislative District 15

    Source last checked Oct 21, 2026

  6. Aug 30, 2021 County Courts and officials Settled

    Yakima County agrees to single-member districts in first Washington Voting Rights Act settlement

    On August 30, 2021 the Yakima County Board of Commissioners agreed to replace at-large voting for commissioners with single-member districts, with all three seats on the 2022 ballot, in Aguilar v. Yakima County, which Campaign Legal Center calls "the first under the WVRA."

    Related: Governor signs the Washington Voting Rights Act of 2018

    Source last checked Oct 20, 2026

  7. Apr 7, 2021 State Laws and rules Enacted

    Governor approves HB 1078 on voter eligibility after a felony conviction

    Engrossed Substitute House Bill 1078, captioned "Voter eligibility--persons convicted of a felony offense," passed the House 57-41 on February 24, 2021 and the Senate 27-22 on March 24, 2021 and was approved April 7, 2021 as Chapter 10, Laws of 2021, effective January 1, 2022.

    Source last checked Oct 20, 2026

Nationwide

2026

  1. Oct 30, 2026 National Courts and officials Decided by a court

    Ninth Circuit denies Homeland Security a stay of the injunction on its election field operations

    On October 30, 2026, a Ninth Circuit panel (Judges Sidney R. Thomas, Kim McLane Wardlaw and Anthony D. Johnstone) in California Nurses Association v. Mullin (No. 26-7139) denied the federal defendants' motion for a stay pending appeal of the district court's October 21 injunction. The order says the district court properly concluded that CNA/NNU has associational standing to pursue an intimidation claim under Section 11(b) of the Voting Rights Act, and that the federal defendants had not shown they would likely be irreparably harmed without a stay. It describes the injunction as covering operations involving people the enjoined parties know or suspect are U.S. citizens in nine states where CNA/NNU have members and DHS has focused its operations. The same day a judge of the court asked for a vote on rehearing the case en banc, and the parties were directed to file supplemental briefs by 5 p.m. Pacific time on October 30.

    Related: Homeland Security appeals the injunction on its election field operations to the Ninth Circuit · Judge refuses to pause the injunction on Homeland Security election field operations during the appeal

    Source last checked Oct 30, 2026

  2. Oct 30, 2026 National Courts and officials Blocked by a court

    Federal judge bars the Justice and Homeland Security departments from demanding that officials set aside ballots or threatening them with prosecution

    On October 30, 2026, U.S. District Judge Trina L. Thompson granted a temporary restraining order in Service Employees International Union, AFL-CIO v. U.S. Department of Justice (N.D. Cal. No. 3:26-cv-12800). The order bars the defendants from demanding that any state or local election official remove specific registered voters from voter lists, refuse to issue ballots to specific voters, or segregate or not count ballots cast by specific voters for the November 3, 2026 election on the basis that a voter is alleged by the defendants to be ineligible, and from threatening election officials and workers with criminal prosecution over such demands or for processing or counting ballots in compliance with state and federal law. It orders the defendants to tell every state, county or local government that received such a letter or list that the demands and threats have been enjoined, and orders the Justice Department to tell the court of any pending search warrant applications, grand jury subpoenas or other demands for election materials or ballots tied to those lists. The court found the plaintiffs had shown the defendants' actions likely violate Section 11(b) of the Voting Rights Act. The order expires at 5 p.m. on November 16, 2026; a preliminary injunction hearing is set for November 13.

    Related: Unions, LULAC and the NAACP sue the Justice and Homeland Security departments over threats to election workers · Federal prosecutors send letters telling California counties to set aside ballots of voters they suspect are noncitizens · U.S. attorneys ask Washington to set aside ballots from more than 400 registrants they say are noncitizens

    Source last checked Oct 30, 2026

  3. Oct 29, 2026 National Courts and officials Decided by a court

    Judge refuses to pause the injunction on Homeland Security election field operations during the appeal

    On October 29, 2026, U.S. District Judge Araceli Martinez-Olguin denied the federal defendants' October 27 ex parte motion to stay, pending appeal, her October 21 preliminary injunction in California Nurses Association v. Mullin (N.D. Cal. No. 4:26-cv-10680-AMO). The injunction bars Homeland Security field operations involving U.S. citizens through Election Day in the nine states where the department focused its surge operations. The order finds the defendants did not show irreparable harm, notes they filed their appeal five days and the stay motion six days after the injunction, and says the department may still investigate voter fraud "by lawful means" while the injunction is in effect.

    Related: Federal judge bars Homeland Security election field operations aimed at people believed to be citizens in nine states · Homeland Security appeals the injunction on its election field operations to the Ninth Circuit · Ninth Circuit denies Homeland Security a stay of the injunction on its election field operations

    Source last checked Oct 29, 2026

  4. Oct 29, 2026 National Courts and officials Decided by a court

    Judge Boasberg hears the restraining-order motion in DSCC v. Trump and orders the government to answer one interrogatory

    On October 29, 2026, Chief Judge James E. Boasberg of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia held a hearing by Zoom on the plaintiffs' motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction in DSCC v. Trump (No. 1:26-cv-03674); the minute entry says an order is forthcoming. A minute order the same day granted the plaintiffs' motion to expedite discovery in part and denied it in part: the defendants were to answer the plaintiffs' Proposed Interrogatory No. 1 for the period July 1, 2026 to the present by noon on October 30, the plaintiffs may file a supplement on standing by October 31, the defendants may respond by November 1, and the court will rule by November 2, 2026. The order says the defendants may end this process at any time by filing a notice that they will not engage in the conduct sought to be enjoined in connection with the upcoming election. On October 30 the defendants filed a notice saying they had served the plaintiffs' counsel with objections, responses and a list of States in answer to the interrogatory.

    Related: Democratic plaintiffs ask for fast-tracked discovery in their suit over federal pressure on election officials · Democratic plaintiffs ask for a restraining order against federal involvement in voter lists, ballots and counting

    Source last checked Oct 30, 2026

  5. Oct 29, 2026 National Courts and officials Pending

    Unions, LULAC and the NAACP sue the Justice and Homeland Security departments over threats to election workers

    On October 29, 2026, the Service Employees International Union, the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, the League of United Latin American Citizens and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People sued the U.S. Department of Justice, Attorney General Todd Blanche, the Department of Homeland Security and Secretary Markwayne Mullin in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California (No. 3:26-cv-12800). The court's order describes the plaintiffs' request to stop efforts to "intimidate, threaten, or coerce election workers who aid others in exercising their right to vote," and lists claims under Section 11(b) of the Voting Rights Act, the Constitution and the Administrative Procedure Act. The plaintiffs moved for a temporary restraining order on October 30. The case was reassigned to Judge Trina L. Thompson, and on October 30 Judge Araceli Martínez-Olguín found it not related to California Nurses Association v. Mullin.

    Related: Federal prosecutors send letters telling California counties to set aside ballots of voters they suspect are noncitizens · U.S. attorneys ask Washington to set aside ballots from more than 400 registrants they say are noncitizens · Federal judge bars the Justice and Homeland Security departments from demanding that officials set aside ballots or threatening them with prosecution

    Source last checked Oct 30, 2026

  6. Oct 28, 2026 National Courts and officials Pending

    Civil rights groups sue Homeland Security over its citizenship checks of naturalized voters

    On October 28, 2026, OCA-Asian Pacific American Advocates, OCA-San Mateo, OCA-Sacramento and Common Cause sued the Department of Homeland Security, Secretary Markwayne Mullin, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services and its director, Joseph B. Edlow, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California (No. 3:26-cv-12617). The complaint says USCIS adopted an "Unlawful Voter Initiative" in August 2026 that targets naturalized and derivative citizens flagged by Homeland Security as possible noncitizen voters for investigation. It asks the court to vacate the initiative under the Administrative Procedure Act and to order the agencies to expunge records created under it. The ACLU of Northern California's release says the plaintiffs are represented by the ACLU Voting Rights Project.

    Related: Federal judge bars Homeland Security election field operations aimed at people believed to be citizens in nine states

    Source last checked Oct 28, 2026

  7. Oct 28, 2026 National Courts and officials Reported

    Reuters counts more than 100 federal subpoenas for voter records in at least 13 states

    Reuters reported on October 28, 2026 that the administration had issued more than 100 subpoenas demanding records on tens of thousands of voters in at least 13 states, most of them to state and local election officials in the previous three months and some dating to the start of 2026. Reuters says it identified them through public-records requests and interviews with officials; they were issued by the Justice Department and Homeland Security, at least 49 under the authority of grand juries, which indicates criminal investigations. It names Minneapolis, Philadelphia, Los Angeles and other California cities, and the states of Texas, Kansas and Georgia among the places reached. White House spokesperson Lauren Bis told Reuters that "anyone who illegally votes in our elections will be held accountable."

    Related: Secretary of State's office discloses seven Justice Department subpoenas about voter information · Homeland Security subpoenas Texas counties for voters' registration records

    Source last checked Oct 29, 2026

  8. Oct 26, 2026 National Courts and officials Pending

    Homeland Security appeals the injunction on its election field operations to the Ninth Circuit

    On October 26, 2026, the Department of Homeland Security, its component agencies and the officials named in California Nurses Association v. Mullin (N.D. Cal., No. 4:26-cv-10680) filed a notice of appeal to the Ninth Circuit from Judge Araceli Martínez-Olguín's October 21 order granting a preliminary injunction against certain election-related field operations in nine states.

    Related: Federal judge bars Homeland Security election field operations aimed at people believed to be citizens in nine states · Judge refuses to pause the injunction on Homeland Security election field operations during the appeal · Ninth Circuit denies Homeland Security a stay of the injunction on its election field operations

    Source last checked Oct 27, 2026

  9. Oct 26, 2026 National Courts and officials Pending

    Democratic plaintiffs ask for a restraining order against federal involvement in voter lists, ballots and counting

    On October 26, 2026, the plaintiffs in DSCC v. Trump (D.D.C. No. 1:26-cv-03674-JEB), 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, moved for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction. The motion asks the court to bar the defendants from imposing themselves on election procedures the plaintiffs say the Constitution and federal law assign to the states, including removing registered voters from statewide lists, issuing ballots to registered voters, and counting ballots. A joint notice filed October 27 says the parties could not agree on a schedule and that the court had already set a hearing on the plaintiffs' expedited-discovery motion for 2 p.m. on October 29. The government filed its opposition to expedited discovery on October 27 and the plaintiffs replied on October 28.

    Related: Democratic plaintiffs ask for fast-tracked discovery in their suit over federal pressure on election officials · Judge Boasberg hears the restraining-order motion in DSCC v. Trump and orders the government to answer one interrogatory · Groups suing over Homeland Security voter data ask for a restraining order on sending "likely noncitizen" lists · Judge Chutkan keeps the Homeland Security voter-data suit separate from DSCC v. Trump and sets an October 31 hearing

    Source last checked Oct 28, 2026

  10. Oct 23, 2026 National Courts and officials Pending

    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.

    Related: Democratic leaders and party committees sue to bar federal orders removing voters or holding back ballots · Democratic plaintiffs ask for a restraining order against federal involvement in voter lists, ballots and counting · Judge Boasberg hears the restraining-order motion in DSCC v. Trump and orders the government to answer one interrogatory

    Source last checked Oct 24, 2026

  11. Oct 21, 2026 National Courts and officials Blocked by a court

    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.

    Related: Homeland Security appeals the injunction on its election field operations to the Ninth Circuit · Civil rights groups sue Homeland Security over its citizenship checks of naturalized voters · Judge refuses to pause the injunction on Homeland Security election field operations during the appeal

    Source last checked Oct 24, 2026

  12. Oct 20, 2026 National Polling places and drop boxes Reported

    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.

    Related: Justice Department tells Marion County it will send election monitors on November 3; Lake County also named · Justice Department plans election monitors in Bibb, Chatham, Cobb, DeKalb, Fulton and Gwinnett counties · Washington County Election Commission votes to keep Justice Department monitors out of polling places · Justice Department says it will send 1,000 election monitors across all 50 states

    Source last checked Oct 22, 2026

  13. Oct 15, 2026 National Courts and officials Withdrawn

    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.

    Related: Federal court in Massachusetts enjoins Postal Service implementation of Section 3 of Executive Order 14399 · First Circuit refuses to stay the Massachusetts preliminary injunction against parts of the Postal Service ballot-mail rule

    Source last checked Oct 24, 2026

  14. Oct 9, 2026 National Courts and officials Decided by a court

    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.

    Related: Justice Department sues Oregon and Maine for statewide voter registration lists · Justice Department's voter roll lawsuits reach 29 states and the District of Columbia

    Source last checked Oct 29, 2026

  15. October 2026 National Courts and officials Pending

    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.

    Related: Justice Department sues California over about 20,000 registrants it calls likely noncitizens · Democratic plaintiffs ask for fast-tracked discovery in their suit over federal pressure on election officials

    Source last checked Oct 24, 2026

  16. October 2026 National Polling places and drop boxes Reported

    Justice Department says it will send 1,000 election monitors across all 50 states

    The Alaska Beacon (States Newsroom) reported on October 29, 2026 that the Justice Department announced that week that it plans to deploy 1,000 federal monitors across all 50 states for the November 3, 2026 election, and that a department spokesperson said the full list of monitored locations will not be disclosed until Election Day. The report says that in the 2022 midterm elections the department sent monitors to 64 jurisdictions in 24 states.

    Related: Justice Department begins notifying counties it wants to monitor on Election Day 2026

    Source last checked Oct 31, 2026

  17. Sep 25, 2026 National Courts and officials Decided by a court

    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.

    Related: President signs Executive Order 14248 on federal elections

    Source last checked Oct 29, 2026

  18. Sep 18, 2026 National Polling places and drop boxes Pending

    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.

    Related: Latino and voting groups and the City of Denver sue over armed immigration agents at polling places · Arlington County sues to keep armed federal agents away from its polling places

    Source last checked Oct 21, 2026

  19. Sep 13, 2026 National Courts and officials Blocked by a court

    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.

    Related: President signs Executive Order 14399 on citizenship verification and mail ballots · Postal Service issues final rule on ballot mail for federal elections · Federal court in Washington denies preliminary injunctions against Executive Order 14399

    Source last checked Oct 29, 2026

  20. Sep 10, 2026 National Maps and lines Proposed

    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.

    Source last checked Oct 22, 2026

  21. Sep 10, 2026 National Polling places and drop boxes Pending

    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.

    Related: Civil rights and labor groups sue over possible federal immigration agents near polling places

    Source last checked Oct 21, 2026

  22. Sep 10, 2026 National Courts and officials Blocked by a court

    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.

    Related: Federal court in Massachusetts temporarily stays parts of the Postal Service ballot-mail rule for the 2026 election · Postal Service issues final rule on ballot mail for federal elections · Appeals in the Massachusetts Executive Order 14399 and Postal Service cases are voluntarily dismissed

    Source last checked Oct 24, 2026

  23. Aug 27, 2026 National Courts and officials Blocked by a court

    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.

    Related: Postal Service issues final rule on ballot mail for federal elections · Federal court in Massachusetts finds the government violated its injunction by issuing the Postal Service ballot-mail rule · First Circuit refuses to stay the Massachusetts preliminary injunction against parts of the Postal Service ballot-mail rule

    Source last checked Oct 24, 2026

  24. Aug 26, 2026 National Laws and rules Blocked by a court

    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.

    Related: President signs Executive Order 14399 on citizenship verification and mail ballots · Postal Service proposes a rule on ballot mail for federal elections · Federal court in Washington enjoins the Postal Service ballot mail rule · Federal court in Massachusetts finds the government violated its injunction by issuing the Postal Service ballot-mail rule · Federal court in Massachusetts temporarily stays parts of the Postal Service ballot-mail rule for the 2026 election · First Circuit refuses to stay the Massachusetts preliminary injunction against parts of the Postal Service ballot-mail rule

    Source last checked Oct 20, 2026

  25. Aug 25, 2026 National Courts and officials Decided by a court

    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."

    Related: Federal court in Massachusetts enjoins Postal Service implementation of Section 3 of Executive Order 14399 · Postal Service issues final rule on ballot mail for federal elections · Federal court in Massachusetts temporarily stays parts of the Postal Service ballot-mail rule for the 2026 election

    Source last checked Oct 24, 2026

  26. Aug 24, 2026 National Courts and officials Decided by a court

    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.

    Related: Federal court in Massachusetts declares parts of Executive Order 14399 void in a suit by states · President signs Executive Order 14399 on citizenship verification and mail ballots

    Source last checked Oct 21, 2026

  27. Aug 17, 2026 National Courts and officials Pending

    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).

    Related: Federal judge dismisses the Justice Department's suit for the District of Columbia's voter registration list

    Source last checked Oct 24, 2026

  28. Aug 11, 2026 National Courts and officials Blocked by a court

    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."

    Related: President signs Executive Order 14399 on citizenship verification and mail ballots · Federal court in Massachusetts declares parts of Executive Order 14399 void in a suit by states · Postal Service issues final rule on ballot mail for federal elections · Federal court in Massachusetts finds the government violated its injunction by issuing the Postal Service ballot-mail rule · Appeals in the Massachusetts Executive Order 14399 and Postal Service cases are voluntarily dismissed

    Source last checked Oct 20, 2026

  29. Aug 6, 2026 National Courts and officials Decided by a court

    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.

    Related: Justice Department's voter roll lawsuits reach 29 states and the District of Columbia

    Source last checked Oct 24, 2026

  30. Jul 22, 2026 National Laws and rules Failed

    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).

    Related: House passes SAVE America Act text as an amendment to S. 1383, 218-213

    Source last checked Oct 20, 2026

  31. Jun 29, 2026 National Courts and officials Decided by a court

    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."

    Related: Supreme Court decides Bost v. Illinois State Board of Elections

    Source last checked Oct 22, 2026

  32. Jun 25, 2026 National Courts and officials Blocked by a court

    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.

    Related: President signs Executive Order 14399 on citizenship verification and mail ballots · Federal court in Massachusetts enjoins Postal Service implementation of Section 3 of Executive Order 14399

    Source last checked Oct 29, 2026

  33. Jun 2, 2026 National Laws and rules Proposed

    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.

    Related: President signs Executive Order 14399 on citizenship verification and mail ballots · Postal Service issues final rule on ballot mail for federal elections

    Source last checked Oct 20, 2026

  34. May 28, 2026 National Courts and officials Decided by a court

    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."

    Related: President signs Executive Order 14399 on citizenship verification and mail ballots · Federal court in Washington enjoins the Postal Service ballot mail rule

    Source last checked Oct 29, 2026

  35. May 18, 2026 National Courts and officials Decided by a court

    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.

    Related: Eighth Circuit holds private plaintiffs cannot use Section 1983 to enforce Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act · Supreme Court stays Eighth Circuit mandate in Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians v. Howe · Supreme Court decides Louisiana v. Callais · Supreme Court vacates the Eighth Circuit judgment and remands in light of Louisiana v. Callais

    Source last checked Oct 21, 2026

  36. Apr 29, 2026 National Courts and officials Decided by a court

    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."

    Related: Supreme Court decides Allen v. Milligan · Voting Rights Act Amendments of 1982 become law · Supreme Court decides Thornburg v. Gingles

    Source last checked Oct 22, 2026

  37. Mar 31, 2026 National Laws and rules In effect

    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.

    Related: Postal Service issues final rule on ballot mail for federal elections · Federal court in Washington denies preliminary injunctions against Executive Order 14399 · Federal court in Washington enjoins the Postal Service ballot mail rule · Federal court in Massachusetts declares parts of Executive Order 14399 void in a suit by states · Federal court in Massachusetts enjoins Postal Service implementation of Section 3 of Executive Order 14399

    Source last checked Oct 20, 2026

  38. Feb 26, 2026 National Courts and officials Pending

    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."

    Related: Justice Department sues Oregon and Maine for statewide voter registration lists · Federal court vacates Justice Department voter-roll policy in Common Cause v. Department of Justice · Federal judge dismisses the Justice Department's suit for Colorado's voter registration list · Federal judge dismisses the Justice Department's suit for Connecticut's voter registration list · Federal judge dismisses the Justice Department's suit for Arizona's voter registration list · Federal judge dismisses the Justice Department's suit for the District of Columbia's voter registration list

    Source last checked Oct 24, 2026

  39. Feb 11, 2026 National Laws and rules Failed

    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.

    Related: House passes SAVE Act, 220-208; Senate does not act · House passes bill with a photo-ID voting requirement; Senate cloture vote fails, 53-47, on September 30, 2026

    Source last checked Oct 20, 2026

  40. Jan 14, 2026 National Courts and officials Decided by a court

    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."

    Related: Supreme Court decides Watson v. Republican National Committee

    Source last checked Oct 22, 2026

2025

  1. Nov 24, 2025 National Laws and rules In effect

    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

  2. Oct 31, 2025 National Courts and officials Blocked by a court

    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.

    Related: President signs Executive Order 14248 on federal elections · Federal court in Washington blocks parts of Executive Order 14248

    Source last checked Oct 20, 2026

  3. Oct 24, 2025 National Polling places and drop boxes In effect

    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 29, 2026

  4. Sep 16, 2025 National Courts and officials Pending

    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.

    Related: Justice Department's voter roll lawsuits reach 29 states and the District of Columbia · Federal court vacates Justice Department voter-roll policy in Common Cause v. Department of Justice

    Source last checked Oct 24, 2026

  5. Jul 24, 2025 National Courts and officials Decided by a court

    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.

    Related: Voting Rights Act Amendments of 1982 become law

    Source last checked Oct 20, 2026

  6. Jun 13, 2025 National Courts and officials Blocked by a court

    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.

    Related: President signs Executive Order 14248 on federal elections · Federal court in Washington blocks parts of Executive Order 14248

    Source last checked Oct 29, 2026

  7. May 14, 2025 National Courts and officials Decided by a court

    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.

    Related: Voting Rights Act Amendments of 1982 become law · Supreme Court stays Eighth Circuit mandate in Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians v. Howe · Eighth Circuit holds private plaintiffs cannot enforce Section 2 in the circuit and vacates the map ruling

    Source last checked Oct 23, 2026

  8. Apr 24, 2025 National Courts and officials Blocked by a court

    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).

    Related: President signs Executive Order 14248 on federal elections · Federal court permanently bars the Election Assistance Commission from implementing Section 2(a) of Executive Order 14248

    Source last checked Oct 20, 2026

  9. Apr 10, 2025 National Laws and rules Failed

    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.

    Related: House passes SAVE America Act text as an amendment to S. 1383, 218-213

    Source last checked Oct 20, 2026

  10. Mar 25, 2025 National Laws and rules In effect

    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.

    Related: Federal court in Washington blocks parts of Executive Order 14248 · Federal court permanently bars the Election Assistance Commission from implementing Section 2(a) of Executive Order 14248 · Supreme Court grants stay in Department of Homeland Security v. League of Women Voters, on voter citizenship checks · Federal court in Massachusetts blocks parts of Executive Order 14248 in a suit by 19 states

    Source last checked Oct 20, 2026

2024

  1. May 23, 2024 National Courts and officials Decided by a court

    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

  2. Mar 4, 2024 National Courts and officials Decided by a court

    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

  1. Jun 27, 2023 National Courts and officials Decided by a court

    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 29, 2026

  2. Jun 8, 2023 National Courts and officials Decided by a court

    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.

    Related: Voting Rights Act of 1965 signed into law · Supreme Court decides Louisiana v. Callais

    Source last checked Oct 29, 2026

2022

  1. Dec 29, 2022 National Laws and rules Enacted

    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 29, 2026

  2. Jan 19, 2022 National Laws and rules Failed

    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.

    Related: Senate vote to begin debate on the Freedom to Vote Act fails, 49-51 · House passes John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act; Senate cloture vote on November 3, 2021 is 50-49 and fails

    Source last checked Oct 20, 2026

2021

  1. Oct 20, 2021 National Laws and rules Failed

    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.

    Related: For the People Act of 2021 passes the House; Senate committee discharge vote is 50-49 and the bill stalls · Senate cloture on the Freedom to Vote: John R. Lewis Act fails, 49-51

    Source last checked Oct 20, 2026

  2. Aug 24, 2021 National Laws and rules Failed

    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.

    Related: House passes Voting Rights Advancement Act of 2019; no Senate vote follows · Senate cloture on the Freedom to Vote: John R. Lewis Act fails, 49-51

    Source last checked Oct 20, 2026

  3. Aug 12, 2021 National Maps and lines Settled

    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.

    Source last checked Oct 22, 2026

  4. Jul 1, 2021 National Courts and officials Decided by a court

    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.

    Related: Voting Rights Act Amendments of 1982 become law

    Source last checked Oct 29, 2026

  5. Apr 26, 2021 National Maps and lines Settled

    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 29, 2026

  6. Mar 3, 2021 National Laws and rules Failed

    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.

    Related: House passes For the People Act of 2019; no Senate vote follows · Senate vote to begin debate on the Freedom to Vote Act fails, 49-51

    Source last checked Oct 22, 2026

  7. Feb 10, 2021 National Polling places and drop boxes In effect

    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.

    Related: Help America Vote Act of 2002 becomes law

    Source last checked Oct 29, 2026

2020

  1. Dec 11, 2020 National Courts and officials Decided by a court

    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.