桃子视频

The Department of Justice sued the Hawai鈥榠 Secretary of State, demanding the state produce its full, unredacted voter file, which contains highly sensitive and personal data on every voter in the state. This suit appears to be part of the federal government's efforts to build a national voter database without congressional authorization and to improperly question the validity of state voter rolls.

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.

This case asks whether government officials who intentionally violate the law are immune from damages suits under a state statute governing such suits, and if so, whether the statute itself violates the Open Courts Clause of the Utah Constitution. Utah鈥檚 Open Courts Clause, like similar provisions in thirty-nine other states across the country, protects an individual鈥檚 right to seek judicial remedies for wrongs committed against them. It therefore serves as an important tool that does not exist in the U.S. Constitution to hold government actors accountable.

This case raises the question whether New Mexico courts should retire their current, federal-centric approach to interpreting the New Mexico Constitution鈥攁 method known as the 鈥渋nterstitial approach鈥濃�攁nd embrace an independent approach that would allow them to more readily diverge from federal courts in light of New Mexico鈥檚 own law, history, and values. The Court鈥檚 decision could have major implications for New Mexicans鈥� ability to vindicate their state constitutional rights.

In 2020, in a nearly unanimous bipartisan vote, Mississippi joined eighteen other states in accepting mail ballots postmarked by Election Day that arrived after Election Day (in Mississippi鈥檚 case, up to five business days). This lawsuit by partisan actors seeks to disenfranchise these voters whose ballot is mailed by Election Day but鈥攖hrough no fault of their own鈥攄oes not arrive until afterwards. In Mississippi, this harm will fall disproportionately on voters with disabilities, older voters, and other communities that rely upon absentee voting. Twisting the words and meaning of Congress, the RNC argues that three longstanding federal laws that set a uniform election day for federal races require that ballot may only be counted if they are received by election officials by Election Day. If accepted, this radical argument would not only disenfranchise thousands upon thousands of voters in Mississippi and eighteen other states, but also upend election administration in every state.