Pennsylvania
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 Pennsylvania, then national events that apply here. See the national timeline.
In Pennsylvania
2026
-
Justice Department tells Pennsylvania it will send election monitors to Allegheny, Lehigh, Luzerne and Philadelphia counties
The Pennsylvania Capital-Star reported on October 26, 2026 that the U.S. Department of Justice notified Secretary of the Commonwealth Al Schmidt the previous week that it plans to send federal election monitors to polling places in Allegheny, Lehigh, Luzerne and Philadelphia counties on November 3. It quoted the department's letter: "Our monitors only observe and take notes." The letter said monitors will introduce themselves to poll managers, will not wear uniforms or pins identifying the department, will not speak with voters inside polling places and may not carry firearms. Luzerne County Manager Romilda Crocamo said monitors also came to the county in 2022 and 2024 and that under state law they may monitor but not go into polling places.
Counties: Allegheny County, Lehigh County, Luzerne County, Philadelphia County
- DOJ election monitors to be deployed in four Pennsylvania counties on election day (Pennsylvania Capital-Star, Oct. 26, 2026) ↗ News report, Pennsylvania Capital-Star
Source last checked Oct 26, 2026
-
Westmoreland County Election Board moves polling places; commissioners do not take up a Greensburg drop box
The Latrobe Bulletin reported on October 8, 2026 that the Westmoreland County Election Board approved polling-place changes for the November election in Latrobe, Unity Township and Mount Pleasant Township, plus changes in Monessen, Irwin, New Kensington and Lower Burrell, which the elections director said were mainly due to buildings closing or being unavailable. At the same meeting, a motion by Commissioner Ted Kopas to add a ballot drop box in Greensburg died for lack of a second from the other two commissioners, who said drop boxes used in the county from 2020 to 2023 were underused compared with their cost.
- Unity and Latrobe polling places shift; county residents still asking for drop boxes (read through a web.archive.org copy) ↗ News report, Latrobe Bulletin
Source last checked Oct 24, 2026
-
Centre County Board of Elections moves six polling places after an accessibility audit
StateCollege.com reported on September 16, 2026 that the Centre County Board of Elections on September 10 approved moving the polling places for six precincts (5, 20, 66, 80, 89 and 91) for the November 3 election, after the first phase of an accessibility audit of 15 polling places by Dan Willis Architecture, which the commissioners hired in October 2025 under a contract of $10,500.
- StateCollege.com (Geoff Rushton): Centre County changes several polling places after first phase of accessibility audit, Sept. 16, 2026 ↗ News report, StateCollege.com
Source last checked Oct 24, 2026
-
Supreme Court asks the Solicitor General for views on the Pennsylvania mail ballot date case
The Supreme Court docket for Republican National Committee v. Eakin (Nos. 25-962 and 25-967), docketed February 13, 2026, records that on June 29, 2026 "The Solicitor General is invited to file a brief in this case expressing the views of the United States."
Source last checked Oct 24, 2026
-
Federal judge dismisses the Justice Department's suit for Pennsylvania's voter files
Democracy Docket reported that on Saturday, June 27, 2026 a federal judge dismissed the Justice Department's lawsuit against Secretary of the Commonwealth Al Schmidt, who had rejected its request for the state's unredacted voter files. ABC27 reported that the Justice Department filed a notice of appeal to the Third Circuit on July 6, 2026.
- United States v. Schmidt, No. 2:25-cv-01481-CB (W.D. Pa. June 27, 2026), Memorandum and Order (ECF 146); docket at courtlistener.com/docket/71453026 ↗
- Pennsylvania's voter rolls are safe from DOJ's grab, rules federal judge ↗ News report, Democracy Docket
- Justice Department appeals dismissal of Pennsylvania voter data lawsuit ↗ News report, ABC27
Source last checked Oct 24, 2026
-
Delaware County Board of Elections consolidates 88 precincts for the May 2026 primary
The Delaware County Elections report of January 29, 2026 says the county had 428 precincts through 2025, averaging 958 voters each, and that its Board of Elections consolidated 88 precincts (41 pairs and two trios) in January 2026. The plan was authorized by the Board in January 2025, pursued through hearings in the Court of Common Pleas in 2025, and reviewed by the Pennsylvania Department of State. The consolidations take effect at the May 19, 2026 primary.
Source last checked Oct 24, 2026
2025
-
Pennsylvania Supreme Court rules Washington County's no-notice policy for rejected mail ballots violated voters' due process rights
State Court Report reported that on September 26, 2025 the Pennsylvania Supreme Court decided Center for Coalfield Justice v. Washington County Board of Elections, holding that a policy of giving no notice to voters whose mail-in ballots were disqualified as defective, and giving the misimpression that they could not vote provisionally, violated their due process rights.
- Center for Coalfield Justice v. Washington County Board of Elections, 28 WAP 2024 (Pa., September 26, 2025) ↗
- State Court Report analysis, updated September 29, 2025 ↗ News report, State Court Report
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
-
Justice Department sues Pennsylvania for its statewide voter registration list
The Justice Department filed United States v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, No. 2:25-cv-01481, in the Western District of Pennsylvania on September 25, 2025 under the National Voter Registration Act, the Help America Vote Act and the Civil Rights Act, seeking the state's voter registration list and information on its list maintenance. The case was dismissed on June 27, 2026.
- Memorandum and order granting the motions to dismiss, United States v. Pennsylvania, No. 2:25-cv-01481 (W.D. Pa. June 27, 2026), Doc. 146 (CourtListener copy) ↗
- United States v. Pennsylvania, No. 2:25-cv-01481, complaint (W.D. Pa., filed September 25, 2025) ↗
Source last checked Oct 24, 2026
-
Third Circuit holds Pennsylvania's rule rejecting undated or misdated mail ballots unconstitutional
On August 26, 2025, in Eakin v. Adams County Board of Elections, the Third Circuit wrote that, weighing the burden on the right to vote against the State's interest, "the balance of the scales leads us to hold that it does not comply with our Constitution," and affirmed the district court judgment. Rehearing was denied on October 14, 2025.
- Eakin v. Adams County Board of Elections, No. 25-1644 (3d Cir., August 26, 2025) ↗
- Supreme Court docket 25-962, Republican National Committee v. Eakin ↗
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
-
Justice Department drops its Voting Rights Act lawsuit over Hazleton city council elections
On April 21, 2025, the United States filed a notice of voluntary dismissal of United States v. City of Hazleton (M.D. Pa., No. 3:25-cv-45), which it had filed on January 7, 2025 over the election of the five-member city council at large. On April 22, 2025, Judge Karoline Mehalchick approved the stipulation and ordered the case "DISMISSED pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(i)." The city had moved to dismiss on March 10, 2025.
- United States v. City of Hazleton, M.D. Pa., Order of April 22, 2025 (Doc. 14) ↗
- United States v. City of Hazleton, Notice of Voluntary Dismissal, April 21, 2025 (Doc. 13) ↗
Source last checked Oct 22, 2026
-
Pennsylvania Supreme Court agrees to hear whether the mail ballot date requirement violates the state constitution
On January 17, 2025, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court granted the petitions for allowance of appeal in Baxter v. Philadelphia Board of Elections (Nos. 395 and 396 EAL 2024), limited to two issues: whether the Commonwealth Court erred in "barring enforcement of the Election Code's mail-in and absentee ballot envelope dating requirements" on the ground that they violate the Free and Equal Elections Clause of Article I, Section 5, and, if not, whether the ruling triggers the nonseverability clause of Act 77 of 2019. Votebeat reported that the plaintiffs are two Philadelphia voters whose ballots in September 2024 special elections were rejected for lacking a date. Justice Donohue filed a concurring and dissenting statement joined by Justice McCaffery. The Department of State's mail ballot guidance (version 3.4.1, September 2026) says the dating issue "is currently before the Pennsylvania Supreme Court" in Baxter (1 EAP 2025, 2 EAP 2025) and that the Department will provide updated guidance.
- Pennsylvania Supreme Court to hear latest case over undated mail ballots ↗ News report, Votebeat
- Baxter v. Philadelphia Board of Elections, Nos. 395 and 396 EAL 2024 (Pa., January 17, 2025), order granting allowance of appeal ↗
- Pennsylvania Department of State: Guidance Concerning Civilian Absentee and Mail-in Ballot Procedures, version 3.4.1, September 2026, note 15 ↗
Source last checked Oct 26, 2026
-
Justice Department sues Hazleton over how its city council is elected
On January 7, 2025, the United States filed United States v. City of Hazleton (M.D. Pa., No. 3:25-cv-45), a complaint under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. The complaint names the City, the Hazleton City Council and Mayor Jeff Cusat and states that the council "consists of five members elected at-large." The Justice Department's list of Section 2 cases also records the filing.
- Justice Department: Cases raising claims under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act ↗
- United States v. City of Hazleton, M.D. Pa., Complaint, January 7, 2025 (Doc. 1) ↗
Source last checked Oct 22, 2026
2024
-
Pennsylvania Supreme Court orders Philadelphia, Montgomery and Bucks counties not to count undated and misdated mail ballots
The Hill reported that on Monday, November 18, 2024 the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, 4 to 3 and using its King's Bench authority, ordered county boards statewide, "including the Boards of Elections in Bucks County, Montgomery County, and Philadelphia County," to comply with its prior rulings that ballots not complying with the Election Code "SHALL NOT BE COUNTED" in the November 5, 2024 election. Justice Wecht wrote that counties must obey the court's orders.
Counties: Philadelphia County, Montgomery County, Bucks County
- Republican National Committee v. All 67 County Boards of Elections, No. 136 MM 2024 (Pa. Nov. 18, 2024), per curiam order (CourtListener copy) ↗
- Pennsylvania Supreme Court rebukes Democratic election officials who counted undated mail ballots ↗ News report, The Hill
Source last checked Oct 24, 2026
-
Cambria County voting hours extended two hours after machines could not scan ballots
NBC10 Philadelphia reported that on Election Day, November 5, 2024, Cambria County filed for emergency relief after a software malfunction kept voting machines from scanning completed ballots, and the county court extended voting hours from 8 p.m. to 10 p.m., with votes cast after 8 p.m. to be by provisional ballot.
- In re Cambria County Board of Elections, No. 2024-4706 (Cambria C.C.P. Nov. 5, 2024), Order extending voting hours from 8:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. (copy posted by Democracy Docket) ↗
- More time to vote in one Pa. county due to issues with voting machines ↗ News report, NBC10 Philadelphia
Source last checked Oct 23, 2026
-
Judge extends mail-ballot-on-demand voting in Bucks County to November 1 after voters were turned away
CBS Philadelphia reported that on Wednesday, October 30, 2024 a Bucks County Court of Common Pleas judge ruled the county's Board of Elections violated the Pennsylvania Election Code by turning away voters who sought to apply for and receive a mail ballot before the 5 p.m. October 29 deadline. The order let voters apply for, receive, vote and return a mail-in ballot until close of business on November 1. The Trump and McCormick campaigns had sued.
- Donald J. Trump for President 2024, Inc. v. Bucks County Board of Elections, No. 2024-06880 (Bucks C.C.P.), Supplemental Clarification Order dated Oct. 30, 2024 (copy posted by Democracy Docket) ↗
- Judge extends mail ballot voting in Bucks County after Trump, McCormick campaigns file lawsuit ↗ News report, CBS Philadelphia
Source last checked Oct 23, 2026
-
Pennsylvania Supreme Court rules voters whose mail ballots were rejected may cast provisional ballots that must be counted
State Court Report reported that on October 23, 2024, in Genser v. Butler County Board of Elections, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court denied the Republican National Committee's appeal and held that voters whose mail ballots were invalid have a right to vote provisionally. On November 1, 2024 the U.S. Supreme Court denied the RNC's request to stay the decision.
- Genser v. Butler County Board of Elections, 26 WAP 2024 (Pa., October 23, 2024) ↗
- Pennsylvania Supreme Court Says Provisional Ballots Cast by Voters Whose Mail-Ballots Were Invalid Must Be Counted ↗ News report, State Court Report
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
2022
-
Luzerne County runs short of ballot paper on Election Day; polls kept open two extra hours
Spotlight PA reported that on Election Day 2022 a judge kept polls open for two extra hours in Luzerne County after ballot paper shortages stopped voting in 16 of its 143 polling locations. A federal lawsuit filed in March 2023 by two voters who could not vote at polling places in Freeland and Shickshinny was settled in October 2024: the county agreed to pay $30,000 in litigation expenses and to train election workers, including on ordering enough paper.
- In re Extension of Time for Polls to Remain Open in the 2022 General Election, No. 09970 of 2022 (Luzerne C.C.P. Nov. 8, 2022), Order of Judge Gelb extending voting hours to 10:00 p.m. (copy posted by Democracy Docket) ↗
- French v. County of Luzerne, No. 3:23-cv-00538 (M.D. Pa.), docket: voluntary dismissal Oct. 15, 2024, approved Oct. 21, 2024 ↗
- PA county settles suit over ballot paper shortages in 2022 ↗ News report, Spotlight PA
Source last checked Oct 23, 2026
-
Commonwealth Court orders Berks, Fayette and Lancaster to count about 800 undated mail ballots in the primary
The Associated Press reported that on Friday, August 19, 2022 Commonwealth Court President Judge Renee Cohn Jubelirer ordered Berks, Fayette and Lancaster counties to add about 800 contested mail-in ballots, lacking handwritten dates on their return envelopes, to the results of the May primary. She agreed with the state that the lack of a date was a minor irregularity.
Counties: Berks County, Fayette County, Lancaster County
- Chapman v. Berks County Board of Elections, No. 355 M.D. 2022 (Pa. Commw. Ct. Aug. 19, 2022), opinion and order of President Judge Cohn Jubelirer (Unified Judicial System of Pennsylvania) ↗
- 3 Pennsylvania counties ordered to count mail-in votes ↗ News report, Associated Press
Source last checked Oct 23, 2026
-
State sues Berks, Fayette and Lancaster counties for refusing to certify primary results that include undated mail ballots
The Pennsylvania Department of State and acting Secretary Leigh Chapman filed a petition for review in the Commonwealth Court on July 11, 2022 (No. 355 M.D. 2022) asking it to order the boards of elections in Berks, Fayette and Lancaster counties to certify the results of the May 17 primary, and filed an emergency application for relief on July 12. NBC News reported that the counties had refused to certify because mail ballots cast without handwritten dates on the envelope were included.
Counties: Berks County, Fayette County, Lancaster County
- Chapman v. Berks County Board of Elections, No. 355 M.D. 2022 (Pa. Commw. Ct.), Petition for Review filed July 11, 2022 (Unified Judicial System of Pennsylvania) ↗
- Pennsylvania sues county election boards over refusal to certify primary results ↗ News report, NBC News
Source last checked Oct 21, 2026
-
Supreme Court denies a stay in a dispute over counting undated Pennsylvania mail ballots
On June 9, 2022, in Ritter v. Migliori (No. 21A772), the Supreme Court denied an application for a stay. Justice Alito, joined by Justices Thomas and Gorsuch, dissented, writing that the Third Circuit's interpretation of 52 U.S.C. 10101(a)(2)(B) "broke new ground" and "appears to me ... very likely wrong."
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
-
Lancaster County Board of Elections removes its only ballot drop box
FOX43 reported on April 14, 2022 that the Lancaster County Board of Elections decided on Wednesday, April 13, after two days of discussion, to remove the county's sole drop box for mail-in ballots, which had been inside the county government center in Lancaster since 2020. The station reported the box served about 344,000 registered voters. The board's chair, Commissioner Ray D'Agostino, said no one was denied access to the box and that ballots were returned without a drop box for about 100 years, up until 2019; the county Democratic Party chair, Diane Topakian, called the move a blow to seniors.
- Lancaster County Commissioners to close only ballot drop box in the area (read through a web.archive.org copy) ↗ News report, FOX43
Source last checked Oct 24, 2026
-
Pennsylvania Supreme Court rules the Legislative Reapportionment Commission plan has the force of law
On March 16, 2022, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court issued a per curiam order on appeals from the Commission’s February 4, 2022 final plan, finding that the plan is not contrary to law and therefore has "the force of law," and ordering that "said Plan shall be used in all forthcoming elections to the General Assembly until the next constitutionally-mandated reapportionment shall be approved."
Source last checked Oct 24, 2026
-
Pennsylvania Supreme Court selects the Carter plan as the new congressional map
In Carter v. Chapman (No. 7 MM 2022), the Pennsylvania Supreme Court assumed jurisdiction on February 2, 2022 and decided the case on February 23, 2022. Justice Dougherty’s concurring opinion, filed March 9, 2022 with the majority opinion, refers to "the Court’s selection of the Carter Plan for the primary and general elections for seats in the United States House of Representatives commencing May 17, 2022."
- Carter v. Chapman, 7 MM 2022 (Pa., decided February 23, 2022; opinions filed March 9, 2022) ↗
- Carter v. Chapman (All About Redistricting, Loyola Law School) ↗ News report, Loyola Law School
Source last checked Oct 22, 2026
-
Legislative Reapportionment Commission approves final state House and Senate plans
The Pennsylvania Legislative Reapportionment Commission states that on Friday, February 4, 2022 it approved the Final Reapportionment Plan for the Pennsylvania House of Representatives and Senate under Article II, Section 17(c) of the Pennsylvania Constitution.
Source last checked Oct 22, 2026
2021
-
Federal determination requires election materials for the Hispanic language group in Berks County, Pennsylvania
The Director of the Census Bureau's notice, published in the Federal Register on December 8, 2021 (86 FR 69611), lists Berks County, Pennsylvania, 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 the Hispanic language group in Lehigh County, Pennsylvania
The Director of the Census Bureau's notice, published in the Federal Register on December 8, 2021 (86 FR 69611), lists Lehigh County, Pennsylvania, 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 Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania
The Director of the Census Bureau's notice, published in the Federal Register on December 8, 2021 (86 FR 69611), lists Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania, as covered by Section 203 of the Voting Rights Act for these language minority groups: Hispanic; Chinese (including Taiwanese). 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
2020
-
Supreme Court denies a stay of the Pennsylvania ruling on the mail ballot deadline
The Supreme Court docket for No. 20A54, Republican Party of Pennsylvania v. Boockvar, records that on October 19, 2020 the application for a stay was denied by the Court, with Justices Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh noted as ones who would grant it.
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
-
Pennsylvania Supreme Court extends the mail ballot receipt deadline by three days for the 2020 election
ABC News reported that on Thursday, September 17, 2020, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled that mailed ballots postmarked on or before 8 p.m. on Election Day and received by 5 p.m. the Friday after would be counted, with ballots lacking a readable postmark presumed timely unless evidence showed otherwise. ABC described it as one of three key wins for Democrats that day, including a ruling on drop box use.
- Pennsylvania Democratic Party v. Boockvar, No. 133 MM 2020 (Pa. Sept. 17, 2020), opinion of Justice Baer (CourtListener copy) ↗
- Democrats land legal wins on mail ballot deadline, drop box use in Pennsylvania ↗ News report, ABC News
Source last checked Oct 21, 2026
-
Governor signs Act 12, moving Pennsylvania's 2020 primary to June 2
The Joint State Government Commission reports that Senate Bill 422 was signed into law on March 27, 2020 as Act 12 (P.L. 41). The Committee of Seventy reported the same day that the General Assembly and Governor approved a bill shifting the 2020 primary election to June 2 with emergency provisions.
- Joint State Government Commission: Act 12 of 2020 Election Law Advisory Board, Legislative Update Summer 2020 ↗
- General Assembly and Governor Approve Bill to Move 2020 Primary (Committee of Seventy press release) ↗ News report, Committee of Seventy
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
2019
-
Governor signs Act 77, creating no-excuse mail voting in Pennsylvania
The Joint State Government Commission reports that Senate Bill 421 was signed into law on October 31, 2019 as Act 77 (P.L. 552). It lets Pennsylvanians vote by mail up to 50 days before an election without an excuse, lets voters join a permanent mail ballot list, moves the registration deadline to 15 days before an election, ends straight-party voting and authorizes a $90 million bond to help counties buy voting systems with a paper trail. It passed the Senate 35 to 14 and the House 138 to 61.
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
2018
-
Supreme Court denies a stay of the Pennsylvania ruling on the congressional map
The Supreme Court docket for No. 17A909, an application by House and Senate leaders to stay the Pennsylvania Supreme Court's order, shows the application was submitted to Justice Alito on February 27, 2018, referred to the Court on March 19, 2018, and denied that day.
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
-
Pennsylvania Supreme Court orders an end to use of the 2011 congressional plan
On January 22, 2018, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court entered a per curiam order deeming the 2011 Plan to "clearly, plainly and palpably violate[ ]" the state constitution and enjoining its further use, with a deadline of February 15, 2018 for a remedial plan. In its February 7, 2018 opinion the court held that the 2011 Plan violates Article I, Section 5, the Free and Equal Elections Clause.
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
2016
-
Federal determination requires election materials for the Hispanic language group in Berks County, Pennsylvania
The Director of the Census Bureau's notice, published in the Federal Register on December 5, 2016 (81 FR 87532), lists Berks County, Pennsylvania, 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. The county also appears in the 2021 notice.
- Federal Register notice, Voting Rights Act determinations under Section 203 (81 FR 87532, December 5, 2016) ↗
- Census Bureau Section 203 determination data files, 2016 ↗
Source last checked Oct 24, 2026
-
Federal determination requires election materials for the Hispanic language group in Lehigh County, Pennsylvania
The Director of the Census Bureau's notice, published in the Federal Register on December 5, 2016 (81 FR 87532), lists Lehigh County, Pennsylvania, 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. The county also appears in the 2021 notice.
- Federal Register notice, Voting Rights Act determinations under Section 203 (81 FR 87532, December 5, 2016) ↗
- Census Bureau Section 203 determination data files, 2016 ↗
Source last checked Oct 24, 2026
-
Federal determination requires election materials for the Hispanic language group in Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania
The Director of the Census Bureau's notice, published in the Federal Register on December 5, 2016 (81 FR 87532), lists Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania, 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. The county also appears in the 2021 notice.
- Federal Register notice, Voting Rights Act determinations under Section 203 (81 FR 87532, December 5, 2016) ↗
- Census Bureau Section 203 determination data files, 2016 ↗
Source last checked Oct 24, 2026
2014
-
Commonwealth Court strikes down Pennsylvania's 2012 voter ID law
On January 17, 2014, Commonwealth Court Judge Bernard McGinley ruled that the centerpiece of the 2012 voter identification law, the photo ID requirement, "places an unreasonable burden on the fundamental right to vote," according to the Associated Press quoted by NPR. NPR reported that the court had barred enforcement since shortly before the 2012 general election.
- Applewhite v. Commonwealth, No. 330 M.D. 2012 (Pa. Commw. Ct. Jan. 17, 2014), Memorandum Opinion by Judge McGinley, determination on declaratory relief and permanent injunction (copy posted by the Public Interest Law Center) ↗
- Pennsylvania Voter ID Law Struck Down ↗ News report, NPR
Source last checked Oct 23, 2026
2012
-
Pennsylvania Supreme Court sends the voter ID challenge back to Commonwealth Court for a closer look at how the law is being carried out
On September 18, 2012, in Applewhite v. Commonwealth, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court vacated the Commonwealth Court's August 15, 2012 order denying a preliminary injunction against Act 18 of 2012 and returned the case. It wrote that "we are not satisfied with a mere predictive judgment based primarily on the assurances of government officials" and directed the lower court to assess the actual availability of alternate identification cards, adding that if it was "not still convinced" that no voter would be disenfranchised, "that court is obliged to enter a preliminary injunction." The Commonwealth Court was to file a supplemental opinion by October 2, 2012. Justice Todd and Justice McCaffery each filed dissenting statements.
Source last checked Oct 23, 2026
-
Pennsylvania enacts Act 18 of 2012, requiring photo identification to vote
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court cites the voter identification law as the "Act of Mar. 14, 2012, P.L. 195, No. 18." It wrote that the Voter ID Law "was signed into law by the Governor of Pennsylvania in March of this year" and that, for the November 2012 general election and later elections, "the legislation generally requires presentation of a photo identification card as a prerequisite to the casting of ballots by most registered voters." The law directed the Department of Transportation to issue identification cards at no cost to registered voters who swore they had no other proof of identification.
Source last checked Oct 23, 2026
2011
-
Governor signs Act 131 of 2011, Pennsylvania's congressional district plan
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court recorded that Senate Bill 1249 passed the House 136 to 61 and that Governor Corbett signed it into law on December 22, 2011 as Act 131 of 2011, the "2011 Plan".
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
-
Federal determination requires election materials for the Hispanic language group in Berks County, Pennsylvania
The Director of the Census Bureau's notice, published in the Federal Register on October 13, 2011 (76 FR 63602), lists Berks County, Pennsylvania, 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. The county also appears in the 2016 notice.
- Federal Register notice, Voting Rights Act determinations under Section 203 (76 FR 63602, October 13, 2011) ↗
- Census Bureau Section 203 determination data files, 2011 ↗
Source last checked Oct 24, 2026
-
Federal determination requires election materials for the Hispanic language group in Lehigh County, Pennsylvania
The Director of the Census Bureau's notice, published in the Federal Register on October 13, 2011 (76 FR 63602), lists Lehigh County, Pennsylvania, 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. The county also appears in the 2016 notice.
- Federal Register notice, Voting Rights Act determinations under Section 203 (76 FR 63602, October 13, 2011) ↗
- Census Bureau Section 203 determination data files, 2011 ↗
Source last checked Oct 24, 2026
-
Federal determination requires election materials for the Hispanic language group in Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania
The Director of the Census Bureau's notice, published in the Federal Register on October 13, 2011 (76 FR 63602), lists Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania, 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. The county also appears in the 2016 notice.
- Federal Register notice, Voting Rights Act determinations under Section 203 (76 FR 63602, October 13, 2011) ↗
- Census Bureau Section 203 determination data files, 2011 ↗
Source last checked Oct 24, 2026
2007
-
Justice Department and Philadelphia settle over language assistance and equal access for minority voters
The Justice Department states that on October 13, 2006 it sued the City of Philadelphia under Sections 203 and 208 of the Voting Rights Act for failing to establish an effective Spanish bilingual program and for denying limited-English proficient voters their assistor of choice. On April 26, 2007 it filed an amended complaint, adding claims under Sections 2 and 4(e) of the Voting Rights Act and the Help America Vote Act, together with a signed settlement agreement.
- Justice Department: Cases raising claims under the language minority provisions of the Voting Rights Act ↗
- Justice Department: Cases raising claims under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act ↗
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
2004
-
Supreme Court affirms dismissal of the challenge to Pennsylvania's congressional map in Vieth v. Jubelirer
In Vieth v. Jubelirer, argued December 10, 2003 and decided April 28, 2004, the Supreme Court affirmed a three-judge district court's dismissal of a claim that a congressional redistricting plan adopted by Pennsylvania's General Assembly was a political gerrymander. The syllabus states that four Justices "concluded that political gerrymandering claims are nonjusticiable because no judicially discernible and manageable standards for adjudicating such claims exist."
Source last checked Oct 23, 2026
2003
-
Federal court orders protections for Hispanic voters in Berks County after Justice Department suit
The Justice Department states that in United States v. Berks County it alleged the county discriminated against Hispanic, primarily Puerto Rican, voters through hostile treatment at the polls, inadequate language assistance and refusal to let voters bring assistors of their choice, in violation of Sections 2, 4(e) and 208 of the Voting Rights Act. The court granted a preliminary injunction on March 18, 2003 and permanent relief on August 20, 2003, and federal observers monitored later elections.
Source last checked Oct 23, 2026
2002
-
Federal determination requires election materials for the Hispanic language group in Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania
The Director of the Census Bureau's notice, published in the Federal Register on July 26, 2002 (67 FR 48871), lists Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania, 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. The county also appears in the 2011 notice.
- Federal Register notice, Voting Rights Act determinations under Section 203 (67 FR 48871, July 26, 2002) ↗
- Census Bureau Section 203 determination file page, 2002 ↗
Source last checked Oct 24, 2026
Nationwide
2026
-
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.
Source last checked Oct 27, 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
2019
-
House passes Voting Rights Advancement Act of 2019; no Senate vote follows
On December 6, 2019, the House passed H.R. 4, the Voting Rights Advancement Act of 2019, by 228 to 187 (Roll no. 654). It was received in the Senate on December 9, 2019 and referred to the Judiciary Committee; the bill record lists no Senate vote, and it did not become law.
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
-
Supreme Court decides Department of Commerce v. New York, on a census citizenship question
On June 27, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court decided a challenge to the Commerce Secretary's decision to add a citizenship question to the 2020 census. The syllabus says "The Enumeration Clause permits Congress, and by extension the Secretary, to inquire about citizenship on the census questionnaire," and the judgment was "affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded."
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
-
Supreme Court decides Rucho v. Common Cause
On June 27, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court decided cases from North Carolina and Maryland in which voters challenged congressional maps as partisan. The Court held that such claims present "political questions beyond the reach of the federal courts."
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
-
House passes For the People Act of 2019; no Senate vote follows
On March 8, 2019, the House passed H.R. 1, the For the People Act of 2019, by 234 to 193 (Roll no. 118). The bill was received in the Senate on March 12, 2019 and placed on the Senate calendar; the bill record lists no Senate vote on passage, and it did not become law.
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
2018
-
President signs Executive Order 13848 on foreign interference in U.S. elections
Executive Order 13848, dated September 12, 2018, imposes sanctions authority in the event of foreign interference in a U.S. election. The order says "there has been no evidence of a foreign power altering the outcome or vote tabulation in any United States election" and declares a national emergency over the threat of interference.
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
-
Supreme Court decides Gill v. Whitford
On June 18, 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court reviewed a challenge to Wisconsin's state legislative map as a partisan one. The Court held that "The plaintiffs have failed to demonstrate Article III standing."
Source last checked Oct 23, 2026
-
Supreme Court decides Husted v. A. Philip Randolph Institute
On June 11, 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court held that "The process that Ohio uses to remove voters on change-of-residence grounds does not violate the Failure-to-Vote Clause or any other part of the NVRA."
- Husted v. A. Philip Randolph Institute, 584 U.S. 756 (2018), U.S. Reports, Volume 584 (Supreme Court) ↗
- Husted v. A. Philip Randolph Institute, No. 16-980 (U.S. June 11, 2018), syllabus and opinions (Cornell Legal Information Institute copy) ↗
Source last checked Oct 22, 2026
-
President terminates the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity
Executive Order 13820, dated January 3, 2018 and published January 8, 2018, revoked Executive Order 13799 and states that "the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity is accordingly terminated."
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
2017
-
Supreme Court decides Cooper v. Harris
On May 22, 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court reviewed North Carolina's congressional Districts 1 and 12. The syllabus says the lower court "did not err in concluding that race furnished the predominant rationale for District 1's redesign and that the State's interest in complying with the VRA could not justify that consideration of race."
Source last checked Oct 23, 2026
-
President establishes the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity
Executive Order 13799, dated May 11, 2017 and published May 16, 2017, established the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, chaired by the Vice President, to "study the registration and voting processes used in Federal elections."
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
-
Homeland Security designates election infrastructure as critical infrastructure
On January 6, 2017, Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson said he had determined "that election infrastructure in this country should be designated as a subsector of the existing Government Facilities critical infrastructure sector." The statement defines election infrastructure as including "storage facilities, polling places, and centralized vote tabulations locations" and voter registration databases and voting machines.
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
2016
-
Supreme Court decides Evenwel v. Abbott
On April 4, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court held that "a State or locality may draw its legislative districts based on total population," according to its syllabus.
Source last checked Oct 23, 2026
2013
-
Supreme Court decides Shelby County v. Holder
On June 25, 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court held that Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act is unconstitutional and that its formula can no longer be used as a basis for requiring places to get federal approval ("preclearance") before changing voting procedures.
Source last checked Oct 23, 2026
-
Supreme Court decides Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Arizona
On June 17, 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court held that "Arizona's evidence-of-citizenship requirement, as applied to Federal Form applicants, is pre-empted by the NVRA's mandate that States 'accept and use' the Federal Form."
Source last checked Oct 23, 2026
-
President establishes the Presidential Commission on Election Administration
Executive Order 13639, dated March 28, 2013 and published April 3, 2013, established the Presidential Commission on Election Administration. The order says the commission "shall identify best practices and otherwise make recommendations to promote the efficient administration of elections."
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
2009
-
Military and Overseas Voter Empowerment Act becomes law
Section 575 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law 111-84, dated October 28, 2009) may be cited as the "Military and Overseas Voter Empowerment Act." It adds a requirement that states transmit a validly requested absentee ballot to an absent uniformed services voter or overseas voter not later than 45 days before a federal election, when the request is received at least 45 days before it.
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
-
Supreme Court decides Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District No. One v. Holder
On June 22, 2009, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the Voting Rights Act "must be interpreted to permit all political subdivisions, including the district, to seek to bail out from the preclearance requirements," and so did not decide the constitutional question. The syllabus also says the Act "now raises serious constitutional concerns."
Source last checked Oct 23, 2026
-
Supreme Court decides Bartlett v. Strickland
On March 9, 2009, the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed a North Carolina ruling. A three-Justice opinion concluded that Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act "does not require state officials to draw election-district lines to allow a racial minority that would make up less than 50 percent of the voting-age population in the redrawn district to join with crossover voters to elect the minority's candidate of choice."
Source last checked Oct 23, 2026
2008
-
Supreme Court decides Crawford v. Marion County Election Board
On April 28, 2008, the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed the ruling upholding Indiana's photo identification law (SEA 483). Justice Stevens, joined by two other Justices, concluded that "the evidence in the record does not support a facial attack on SEA 483's validity."
Source last checked Oct 23, 2026
2006
-
Supreme Court decides Purcell v. Gonzalez
On October 20, 2006, the U.S. Supreme Court vacated a Ninth Circuit order that had blocked Arizona's new voter identification requirements before the November election. The Court said that vacating the order "shall of necessity allow the election to proceed without an injunction suspending the requirements" and expressed "no opinion on the correct disposition of the appeals."
Source last checked Oct 23, 2026
-
Voting Rights Act reauthorized and amended in 2006
Public Law 109-246, dated July 27, 2006, may be cited as the "Fannie Lou Hamer, Rosa Parks, and Coretta Scott King Voting Rights Act Reauthorization and Amendments Act of 2006." Among other changes it amended Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act and replaced the references to the 1982 amendments in Section 4(a).
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
-
Supreme Court decides LULAC v. Perry
On June 28, 2006, the U.S. Supreme Court decided challenges to Texas's 2003 congressional redistricting. The Court's syllabus says "Texas' redrawing of District 23's lines amounts to vote dilution violative of § 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965."
Source last checked Oct 23, 2026
2002
-
Help America Vote Act of 2002 becomes law
Public Law 107-252, dated October 29, 2002, is titled, in part, "To establish a program to provide funds to States to replace punch card voting systems, to establish the Election Assistance Commission" to assist in the administration of federal elections, and "to establish minimum election administration standards for States and units of local government with responsibility for the administration of Federal elections."
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
2000
-
Supreme Court decides Bush v. Gore
On December 12, 2000, the U.S. Supreme Court, in a per curiam opinion, reversed the Florida Supreme Court's order for manual recounts. The Court's syllabus says "any recount seeking to meet 3 U.S.C. § 5's December 12 'safe-harbor' date would be unconstitutional under the Equal Protection Clause."
Source last checked Oct 23, 2026
1993
-
Supreme Court decides Shaw v. Reno
On June 28, 1993, the U.S. Supreme Court held that voters stated a claim under the Equal Protection Clause by alleging that a reapportionment plan was "so irrational on its face that it can be understood only as an effort to segregate voters into separate districts on the basis of race," without sufficient justification.
Source last checked Oct 23, 2026
-
National Voter Registration Act of 1993 becomes law
Public Law 103-31, the National Voter Registration Act of 1993, is dated May 20, 1993. The law states its purpose as "to establish procedures that will increase the number of eligible citizens who register to vote in elections for Federal office."
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
1986
-
Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act becomes law
Public Law 99-410, dated August 28, 1986, may be cited as the "Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act." Its subject is voting in federal elections by members of the uniformed services and by citizens living overseas.
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
-
Supreme Court decides Thornburg v. Gingles
On June 30, 1986, the U.S. Supreme Court decided its first case under the 1982 version of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. The syllabus says minority voters who contend that a multimember form of districting violates Section 2 "must prove that the use of a multimember electoral structure operates to minimize or cancel out their ability to elect their preferred candidates."
Source last checked Oct 23, 2026
1984
-
Voting Accessibility for the Elderly and Handicapped Act becomes law
Public Law 98-435, dated September 28, 1984, is titled "To improve access for handicapped and elderly individuals to registration facilities and polling places for Federal elections."
Source last checked Oct 22, 2026
1982
-
Voting Rights Act Amendments of 1982 become law
Public Law 97-205, dated June 29, 1982, rewrote Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act to bar any practice "imposed or applied by any State or political subdivision in a manner which results in a denial or abridgement of the right of any citizen of the United States to vote on account of race or color." It also provided that a section 4 provision expires "at the end of the twenty-five-year period following the effective date" of the 1982 amendments.
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
1980
-
Supreme Court decides City of Mobile v. Bolden
On April 22, 1980, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed a lower-court ruling against Mobile, Alabama's at-large election system. Four Justices concluded that "Racially discriminatory motivation is a necessary ingredient of a Fifteenth Amendment violation." Congress amended Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act in 1982.
Source last checked Oct 23, 2026
1975
-
Voting Rights Act extended in 1975, with language-minority protections
Public Law 94-73, dated August 6, 1975, is titled "To amend the Voting Rights Act of 1965 to extend certain provisions for an additional seven years, to make permanent the ban against certain prerequisites to voting, and for other purposes." It also provides that no voting qualification may be imposed "to deny or abridge the right of any citizen of the United States to vote because he is a member of a language minority group."
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
1971
-
26th Amendment ratified: voting age of 18
The National Archives lists the 26th Amendment as passed by Congress on March 23, 1971, and ratified on July 1, 1971. It reads: "The right of citizens of the United States, who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of age."
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
1970
-
Supreme Court decides Oregon v. Mitchell
On December 21, 1970, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on the 1970 Voting Rights Act Amendments. The Court's syllabus says the 18-year-old minimum-age requirement is valid for national elections but not valid for state and local elections, and that the literacy test provision is valid.
Source last checked Oct 23, 2026
-
Voting Rights Act Amendments of 1970 become law
Public Law 91-285, dated June 22, 1970, is titled "To extend the Voting Rights Act of 1965 with respect to the discriminatory use of tests, and for other purposes." It may be cited as the Voting Rights Act Amendments of 1970.
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
1969
-
Supreme Court decides Allen v. State Board of Elections
On March 3, 1969, the U.S. Supreme Court held that "Private litigants may invoke the jurisdiction of the district courts to obtain relief under § 5" of the Voting Rights Act, according to the Court's syllabus.
Source last checked Oct 23, 2026
1967
-
Congress requires single-member congressional districts (Public Law 90-196)
Public Law 90-196, approved December 14, 1967, provides that in each state entitled to more than one Representative "there shall be established by law a number of districts equal to the number of Representatives to which such State is so entitled," with "no district to elect more than one Representative."
Source last checked Oct 20, 2026
1966
-
Supreme Court decides Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections
On March 24, 1966, the U.S. Supreme Court held that "a State's conditioning of the right to vote on the payment of a fee or tax violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment." The case concerned Virginia's poll tax.
Source last checked Oct 23, 2026
-
Supreme Court decides South Carolina v. Katzenbach
On March 7, 1966, the U.S. Supreme Court decided South Carolina's challenge to the Voting Rights Act of 1965. The Court held that "the sections of the Act properly before this Court are a valid effectuation of the Fifteenth Amendment."
Source last checked Oct 23, 2026
1965
-
Voting Rights Act of 1965 signed into law
President Lyndon Johnson signed the Voting Rights Act into law on August 6, 1965. The National Archives says the act outlawed the discriminatory voting practices adopted in many southern states after the Civil War.
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.
