Fighting Cuts to Voting Access
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.
Status: Ongoing
View Case
Learn About Fighting Cuts to Voting Access
All Cases
48 Fighting Cuts to Voting Access Cases
Ohio
Feb 2026
Fighting Cuts to Voting Access
League of Women Voters of Ohio v. LaRose
Voting-rights and civil-rights organizations filed a federal lawsuit challenging a new Ohio law that threatens to wrongly strip eligible citizens鈥攑articularly naturalized citizens鈥攐f their right to vote.
The case arises from Ohio Senate Bill 293 (SB 293), a law that mandates aggressive, automated purges of Ohio鈥檚 voter rolls based on flawed citizenship data. Under SB 293, state officials are required to conduct frequent database checks and cancel voter registrations for people flagged as 鈥渘oncitizens鈥濃�攐ften without advance notice or a meaningful opportunity to correct mistakes.
Plaintiffs brought this case to stop a system that places thousands of eligible voters at risk of disenfranchisement and undermines fundamental protections guaranteed by federal law and the U.S. Constitution.
Explore case
Ohio
Feb 2026
Fighting Cuts to Voting Access
League of Women Voters of Ohio v. LaRose
Voting-rights and civil-rights organizations filed a federal lawsuit challenging a new Ohio law that threatens to wrongly strip eligible citizens鈥攑articularly naturalized citizens鈥攐f their right to vote.
The case arises from Ohio Senate Bill 293 (SB 293), a law that mandates aggressive, automated purges of Ohio鈥檚 voter rolls based on flawed citizenship data. Under SB 293, state officials are required to conduct frequent database checks and cancel voter registrations for people flagged as 鈥渘oncitizens鈥濃�攐ften without advance notice or a meaningful opportunity to correct mistakes.
Plaintiffs brought this case to stop a system that places thousands of eligible voters at risk of disenfranchisement and undermines fundamental protections guaranteed by federal law and the U.S. Constitution.
Georgia
Feb 2026
Fighting Cuts to Voting Access
Pitts v. United States (Amicus)
The FBI raided Fulton County, Georgia, seizing ballots and other records from the 2020 election. This unprecedented seizure is a continuation of yearslong efforts to challenge Georgia's 2020 election results, now aided by federal law enforcement. Fulton County is fighting back, suing for the return of the records.
Explore case
Georgia
Feb 2026
Fighting Cuts to Voting Access
Pitts v. United States (Amicus)
The FBI raided Fulton County, Georgia, seizing ballots and other records from the 2020 election. This unprecedented seizure is a continuation of yearslong efforts to challenge Georgia's 2020 election results, now aided by federal law enforcement. Fulton County is fighting back, suing for the return of the records.
New Hampshire
Feb 2026
Fighting Cuts to Voting Access
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.
Explore case
New Hampshire
Feb 2026
Fighting Cuts to Voting Access
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.
South Carolina
Feb 2026
Fighting Cuts to Voting Access
NAACP South Carolina State Conference v. Wilson
All voters with disabilities have the right to receive assistance voting from a person of their choice. South Carolina prohibits some voters with disabilities from receiving assistance and limits who voters can rely on for assistance. Voters with disabilities and the NAACP South Carolina State Conference sued to challenge those laws under Section 208 of the Voting Rights Act and protect disabled voters鈥� right to assistance.
Explore case
South Carolina
Feb 2026
Fighting Cuts to Voting Access
NAACP South Carolina State Conference v. Wilson
All voters with disabilities have the right to receive assistance voting from a person of their choice. South Carolina prohibits some voters with disabilities from receiving assistance and limits who voters can rely on for assistance. Voters with disabilities and the NAACP South Carolina State Conference sued to challenge those laws under Section 208 of the Voting Rights Act and protect disabled voters鈥� right to assistance.
Georgia
Jan 2026
Fighting Cuts to Voting Access
United States v. Raffensperger
The Department of Justice sued Georgia, 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 DOJ's efforts to build a national voter database without congressional authorization, improperly question the validity of state voter rolls, and intimidate eligible voters in Georgia and across the country.
Explore case
Georgia
Jan 2026
Fighting Cuts to Voting Access
United States v. Raffensperger
The Department of Justice sued Georgia, 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 DOJ's efforts to build a national voter database without congressional authorization, improperly question the validity of state voter rolls, and intimidate eligible voters in Georgia and across the country.