Fighting Voter Suppression
League of Women Voters of Massachusetts v. Trump
On March 31, 2026, President Trump issued a sweeping Executive Order titled "Ensuring Citizen Verification and Integrity in Federal Elections," seeking once again to seize control of election administration from Congress and the states. The Order directs federal agencies to compile lists of U.S. citizens and transmit them to states before every election, directs the U.S. Postal Service -- an independent agency established by Congress -- to create a list of "approved" mail voters, and instructs USPS to refuse to deliver ballots from voters not on that federally created list. If implemented, the Order would threaten the ability of millions of eligible citizens to cast their ballots, particularly military members, overseas citizens, the elderly, recently naturalized citizens, and voters with disabilities who rely on mail voting.
Status: Ongoing
View Case
Learn About Fighting Voter Suppression
Featured
New Hampshire
Jul 2026
Fighting Voter Suppression
Coalition for Open Democracy v. Scanlan
This lawsuit challenges HB 1569, a new law that will make New Hampshire the only state to require every person to produce documentary proof of citizenship when they register to vote for both state and federal elections. It also challenges HB 1569鈥檚 elimination a preexisting protection for voters鈥攏amely, an affidavit option that allowed voters who faced surprise challenges to their eligibility at the polls to swear to their qualifications and cast a ballot. Accordingly, HB 1569 violates the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution by placing substantial burdens on New Hampshirites at all stages of the voting process, and will arbitrarily disenfranchise hundreds, if not thousands of qualified voters.
Washington, D.C.
Oct 2025
Fighting Voter Suppression
League of Women Voters Education Fund v. Trump
On March 25, 2025, in a sweeping and unprecedented Executive Order, President Trump attempted to usurp the power to regulate federal elections from Congress and the States. Among other things, the Executive Order directs the Election Assistance Commission鈥攁n agency that Congress specifically established to be bipartisan and independent鈥攖o require voters to show a passport or other citizenship documentation in order to register to vote in federal elections. If implemented, the Executive Order would threaten the ability of millions of eligible Americans to register and vote and upend the administration of federal elections.
On behalf of leading voter registration organizations and advocacy organizations, the 桃子视频and co-counsel filed a lawsuit to block the Executive Order as an unconstitutional power grab.
All Cases
102 Fighting Voter Suppression Cases
Pennsylvania Supreme Court
Mar 2025
Fighting Voter Suppression
Baxter v. Philadelphia Board of Elections
Eligible Philadelphia-area voters who submitted mail ballots in the September 17, 2024 special election only to have their votes set aside because they omitted or miswrote the correct date on their outer return envelope 鈥� even though the date is not used for any purpose 鈥� sued to have their votes count. Plaintiffs urge the courts to rule that enforcing the irrelevant envelope-dating requirement to disenfranchise eligible voters violates the Pennsylvania Constitution's Free and Equal Elections Clause.
Explore case
Pennsylvania Supreme Court
Mar 2025
Fighting Voter Suppression
Baxter v. Philadelphia Board of Elections
Eligible Philadelphia-area voters who submitted mail ballots in the September 17, 2024 special election only to have their votes set aside because they omitted or miswrote the correct date on their outer return envelope 鈥� even though the date is not used for any purpose 鈥� sued to have their votes count. Plaintiffs urge the courts to rule that enforcing the irrelevant envelope-dating requirement to disenfranchise eligible voters violates the Pennsylvania Constitution's Free and Equal Elections Clause.
Colorado
Mar 2025
Fighting Voter Suppression
Citizens Project v. City of Colorado Springs
Colorado Springs鈥檚 unusually-timed elections suppress voter turnout鈥攄isproportionately, among the City鈥檚 Black and Hispanic population. This federal court lawsuit challenges the City鈥檚 election timing for violating our clients鈥� right to vote free from denial of abridgment on account of race under the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
Explore case
Colorado
Mar 2025
Fighting Voter Suppression
Citizens Project v. City of Colorado Springs
Colorado Springs鈥檚 unusually-timed elections suppress voter turnout鈥攄isproportionately, among the City鈥檚 Black and Hispanic population. This federal court lawsuit challenges the City鈥檚 election timing for violating our clients鈥� right to vote free from denial of abridgment on account of race under the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
U.S. Supreme Court
Jan 2025
Fighting Voter Suppression
Pennsylvania State Conference of the NAACP v. Schmidt
In November 2022, thousands of Pennsylvania voters were denied the right to vote based on a meaningless paperwork error. They filled out their mail ballots, signed the form on the outer return envelope, and returned their ballots on time. Yet their ballots were not counted, because they either forgot to write the date on their return envelope, or they accidentally wrote the wrong date. The Civil Rights Act prohibits states from disenfranchising voters based on immaterial paperwork error, and we're fighting to make sure that every vote counts
Explore case
U.S. Supreme Court
Jan 2025
Fighting Voter Suppression
Pennsylvania State Conference of the NAACP v. Schmidt
In November 2022, thousands of Pennsylvania voters were denied the right to vote based on a meaningless paperwork error. They filled out their mail ballots, signed the form on the outer return envelope, and returned their ballots on time. Yet their ballots were not counted, because they either forgot to write the date on their return envelope, or they accidentally wrote the wrong date. The Civil Rights Act prohibits states from disenfranchising voters based on immaterial paperwork error, and we're fighting to make sure that every vote counts
U.S. Supreme Court
Jan 2025
Fighting Voter Suppression
Western Native Voice v. Jacobsen
The 桃子视频, 桃子视频of Montana, Native American Rights Fund (NARF), and the Harvard Election Law Clinic challenged two Montana laws that hinder Native American participation in the state鈥檚 electoral process 鈥� HB 530, which prohibited paid third-party ballot collection; and HB 176, which repealed Election Day voter registration (EDR) in Montana. Together, these laws violate a number of provisions in the Montana Constitution: the right to vote, equal protection, free speech, and due process.
Explore case
U.S. Supreme Court
Jan 2025
Fighting Voter Suppression
Western Native Voice v. Jacobsen
The 桃子视频, 桃子视频of Montana, Native American Rights Fund (NARF), and the Harvard Election Law Clinic challenged two Montana laws that hinder Native American participation in the state鈥檚 electoral process 鈥� HB 530, which prohibited paid third-party ballot collection; and HB 176, which repealed Election Day voter registration (EDR) in Montana. Together, these laws violate a number of provisions in the Montana Constitution: the right to vote, equal protection, free speech, and due process.
Texas
Jan 2025
Fighting Voter Suppression
United Sovereign Americans, Inc. v. Nelson
The 桃子视频and partner organizations have sought to intervene to represent the rights of voters and voting-rights organizations in a case seeking to unlawfully purge the Texas voter rolls and block certification of the results of the 2024 election.
Explore case
Texas
Jan 2025
Fighting Voter Suppression
United Sovereign Americans, Inc. v. Nelson
The 桃子视频and partner organizations have sought to intervene to represent the rights of voters and voting-rights organizations in a case seeking to unlawfully purge the Texas voter rolls and block certification of the results of the 2024 election.