Brennan Center’s @seanmorales-doyle.bsky.social testified before the Illinois Accountability Commission on the ways states can stand up to the threats of ICE at the polls. Watch: bit.ly/4dhUuU5

BREAKING: The Supreme Court has completed its decades-long project to destroy the Voting Rights Act. It has blessed racial discrimination and further encouraged partisan gerrymandering in the Callais ruling. 1/2

In today's disastrous opinion in Callais, SCOTUS essentially rewarded the despicable "Southern Strategy" with a free pass to engage in race discrimination so long as the perpetrators call it partisan gerrymandering. Read this excerpt from page 27:

TODAY: Brennan Center’s @seanmorales-doyle.bsky.social testifies before the Illinois Accountability Commission on the ways states can stand up to the threats of ICE at the polls. Watch live at 1 p.m. ET:

Please join me @velshimsnow.bsky.social 10a-1p w/ Mary McCord @gtconway.bsky.social Ron Insana @radiofreetom.bsky.social @jeisinger.bsky.social @adamsmith.house.gov @seanmorales-doyle.bsky.social @errinhaines.bsky.social #Velshi 1/2

This order came almost exactly a year after Trump issued another EO that purported to require Americans to show a passport or other citizenship doc to register using the federal voter registration form. Multiple courts blocked the first order as an impermissible use of power. Yet here we are again.

This order is an illegal and dangerous attempt to rewrite election rules and eliminate accessible voting options that millions of Americans rely on—including older voters, voters with disabilities, active-duty military, and Americans living overseas.

And there’s more. The order directs DHS to create a citizenship list for every state based on several incomplete and outdated databases. If created, this list would be error ridden, and compiling it would itself violate federal privacy law.

The president can’t decide who votes or how they vote, and this attempt to use the post office as way to do just that is plainly a pretense for acting on longstanding lies about mail voting. All evidence shows mail voting is safe and secure.

Our lawsuit explains how the order violates the foundational principle of separation of powers. The Constitution gives authority to run elections to the states and Congress, not the President. Period. Full stop. End of story.

The order would turn the postal service into a decider of whose ballots get delivered and whose don’t. By law, the postal service must deliver all mail, not just the ballots the President has declared eligible for delivery. No one, including the President, has authority to overrule this law.

This is an unconstitutional abuse of power and its drafters seem to not understand how elections actually work. Courts blocked implementation of the president’s last unconstitutional effort to take over elections, and we expect more of the same here. www.brennancenter.org/media/15454/...

This morning, the Brennan Center and co-counsel filed a lawsuit on behalf of several voting rights organizations. We are challenging President Trump’s new executive order that would prevent American citizens from voting by mail. 🧵 www.brennancenter.org/our-work/ana...

As of this morning, we've sued the President over his 2nd executive order. We sued him last year over his 1st order and we won. He has no more authority over elections now than he did then. And this order is no less of a train wreck. So, we expect the same result. brennancenter.org/our-work/analy…

Like we said: President Trump tried an executive order on voting before, we sued him, and we won. He tried again this week. This time his focus was restricting mail voting. So we just sued him again. We expect the same result.

President Trump has signed an executive order on mail voting. He has no lawful authority to write the rules that govern U.S. elections. He tried a year ago; we sued him, and we won. We expect the same result this time.

"The president doesn't have any authority to write the rules that govern our elections. The Constitution gives that power to Congress and to the states, not to the president." — @seanmorales-doyle.bsky.social on Trump's new mail voting executive order.

Our government's citizenship lists are incomplete and inaccurate. The United States Postal Service is overburdened and inadequate. This combines a car crash with a train wreck. 2/2

Breaking: The president has signed an executive order on mail voting. He has no lawful authority to write the rules that govern our elections. He tried a year ago; we sued him; we won. A year later, he has tried again. He can expect the same result. 1/2

Somehow, the SAVE Act might get worse. It already requires a passport or birth certificate to register to vote, which would block millions of American citizens from voting. The new substitute amendment (#4420) would end vote-by-mail as we know it (& more)!

As I told @velshi.com recently, the administration is turning us into a "show your papers" country. I carry around a copy of my passport these days. But millions of Americans don't have ready access to their papers. The SAVE Act would block them from voting.

Today @washingtonpost.com reported activists are urging Trump to declare an emergency based on claims of Chinese interference in the 2020 election and use emergency powers to dramatically alter election rules. Trump has no power to run elections, even in an emergency. 🧵

Media Matters is fighting the Federal Trade Commission's retaliatory investigative tactics. This week, a slate of amici from across the political spectrum filed briefs supporting Media Matters' suit. The highlights (plus the full briefs) @brennancenter.org ⬇️ www.brennancenter.org/our-work/res...

The SAVE Act is an attack on the freedom to vote that would block millions of American citizens from voting. #SOTU #SOTU2026

President Trump's administration “has taken dozens of actions to undermine elections that, together, show that an attempted election ‘takeover’ may be underway,” Sean Morales-Doyle writes.

From the DOJ's attempts to access sensitive voter info to dismantling CISA and pardoning the people responsible for Jan. 6, the Trump administration's campaign to undermine elections is underway. But we can fight back. — @seanmorales-doyle.bsky.social in @nytopinion.nytimes.com: nyti.ms/4rLg4WD

Presidents can't cancel elections. But the administration can attempt to undermine the midterms, @seanmorales-doyle.bsky.social warns in @nytopinion.nytimes.com. It's up to voters, election officials, state law enforcement and advocates to ensure our elections are free and fair.

From the DOJ's attempts to access sensitive voter info to dismantling CISA and pardoning the people responsible for Jan. 6, the Trump administration's campaign to undermine elections is underway. But we can fight back. — @seanmorales-doyle.bsky.social in @nytopinion.nytimes.com

Despite calls to “nationalize” elections, “the president has no lawful authority for such a takeover,” @seanmorales-doyle.bsky.social writes in @nytopinion.nytimes.com. It will be “incumbent on all of us … to see the administration’s efforts for what they are.”

As I said in @nytopinion.nytimes.com, "We are already seeing how effective people can be in pushing back, whether on the streets of Minneapolis or at town halls hosted by their representatives in Congress. It will be incumbent on all of us...to fight back" against federal election interference.

The Department of Justice has been demanding access to voter rolls and suing states that don’t comply — a move that threatens many Americans’ right to vote. Former DOJ officials at the Brennan Center join The Briefing with Michael Waldman to discuss how we can protect our elections. bit.ly/3MCIKCk

In today’s @nytopinion.nytimes.com, @seanmorales-doyle.bsky.social explains how dozens of actions by the Trump administration, together, show that an attempted “takeover” of elections is underway. But we can fight back, he writes.

In today's @nytimes.com, I explain why we should take Trump's recent threat to "take over" elections seriously and how we can fight back against his attempts to undermine democracy.

On ABC News Live, @seanmorales-doyle.bsky.social explains the impact of the SAVE Act’s proof-of-citizenship requirement: “21 million Americans that lack ready access to these documents is more than the entire eligible voting population in the state of Texas." abcnews.com/video/130042...

The SAVE Act could block millions of Americans from voting and if Congress passes it, it would be “the first time Congress has ever used the authority from the Elections Clause to suppress voters” @seanmorales-doyle.bsky.social tells NPR. www.wypr.org/show/midday/...

President Trump’s recent call to nationalize elections is part of a broader agenda to sow distrust and undermine elections, including a renewed push to pass the SAVE Act. The Constitution gives states and Congress the power to set rules for federal elections — not the president.

In an interview with ABC News Live, @seanmorales-doyle.bsky.social explains that the SAVE Act “is a show your papers law, where you’d have to show your birth certificate or your US passport to vote… there are tens of millions of American citizens that don’t have ready access to those documents.”

The SAVE Act, which would require Americans to show a birth certificate or passport to register to vote, would block millions of American citizens from voting. I spoke with @fox32chicago.bsky.social Chicago Live about the danger this bill poses.

“We’ve been saying for months this administration is engaged in a concerted campaign to undermine our elections and attempt a federal takeover of elections. Now, we have it straight from the horse’s mouth.” @seanmorales-doyle.bsky.social in @ms.now www.ms.now/news/trump-e...

I talked about Trump's call to "nationalize elections" on ABC News Live. He's saying out loud what's been clear for months: his administration is engaged in a campaign to undermine our elections through the illegal exercise of federal power. The president has no legal role in running our elections.

The DOJ is pursuing complete voter rolls from almost every state. Many states aren't complying. At least 10 are going along. The “confidential agreement” between the DOJ and some of those states has fine print that adds more risk to an already risky deal for voters. (1/7)

The president can’t nationalize elections, @seanmorales-doyle.bsky.social tells ABC News Live. The Constitution gives the states & Congress the power to set the rules governing our elections, and states & Congress in turn gave that power to run elections to state and local election officials.

Congress failed to pass the SAVE Act last year for good reason: it’s an anti-voter bill. But now lawmakers have revived it despite overwhelming public opposition. Tell Congress to reject the SAVE Act: bit.ly/4tmVIor

Utah's chief election officer, Lt Gov Deidre Henderson, has conducted a review of the state's voter rolls to identify any ineligible voters, including by running her rolls through the DHS SAVE Program. Guess how many non-citizens voted in Utah according to the review? Zero.

House Republicans just introduced a new version of the SAVE Act, which would block millions of eligible American citizens from voting. This renewed effort comes after SAVE Act 1.0 stalled in Congress in the face of nationwide public opposition.

On Friday, a third federal court ruled against President Trump’s anti-voting executive order, reiterating that “the Constitution assigns no authority to the President over federal election administration.” (1/4)

The fall semester has been SUPER busy for the members of the Historians Council on the Constitution. Walk with me through this 🧵for highlights from the historians' work on some of the most pressing legal issues of the day, from agency independence to voting rights... @brennancenter.org

In an interview with John Katko on WCNY, @seanmorales-doyle.bsky.social explains that voter fraud is a “vanishingly rare phenomenon, that doesn’t mean it’s not something we should take seriously, but the fact that it happens so rarely is a sign that we do take it seriously.”

The appellate court said voters cannot sue to challenge discriminatory maps under the Voting Rights Act. The brief explains that's wrong, showing that courts, Congress, the Dep't of Justice, private attorneys, and others have long understood that Section 2 allows voters to do just that. 2/2