Elections

Free and fair elections are an essential pillar of democracy around the world. However, the validity of elections are often threatened by the state or individuals introducing barriers to voting, including violence, and political or financial corruption.

States Already Enacting Harmful SAVE Act Policies, Requiring Proof of Citizenship to Vote

PUBLISHED 5/20/2026 by and

Congressional Republicans are once again prioritizing the SAVE Act, legislation that would force Americans to show documents like a passport or birth certificate to register to vote. The House has already passed yet another version of the bill, but so far it has stalled in the Senate.

If the SAVE Act becomes law, it would block millions of eligible American citizens from voting.

As the Senate considers the SAVE Act, state legislatures are advancing similar “show-your-papers” policies. Florida, South Dakota and Utah have enacted similar laws in recent weeks. Other states that already have similar laws have experienced the difficulties of implementing them.

Including Arizona, which has had a proof-of-citizenship requirement for over 20 years, five states will have a show-your-papers requirement for all voters for the 2026 midterms: Arizona, New Hampshire, South Dakota, Utah and Wyoming. A sixth state, Louisiana, has one on the books that it has not yet implemented.

That’s a lot of strain on the election system to solve a problem that doesn’t exist. The U.S. Senate would be wise not to inflict those obstacles on every election official nationwide.

No Women Were Present at the U.S.-China Negotiations. This Is By Design.

PUBLISHED 5/15/2026 by

Weekend Reading on Women’s Representation is a compilation of stories about women’s representation in politics, on boards, in sports and entertainment, in judicial offices and in the private sector in the U.S. and around the world—with a little gardening and goodwill mixed in for refreshment!

This week:
—Mexico continues to bet the U.S. on women’s political representation.
—A brief explanation on the Supreme Court’s attack on voting rights.
—In a 2028 presidential nomination poll, women lead among Democrats.
—Denise Powell earns a primary nod in a hotly contested Nebraska congressional race.

… and more.

From the Halls of Congress to Out on the Trail, Women Beg the Question: Why Not You?

PUBLISHED 5/8/2026 by

Weekend Reading on Women’s Representation is a compilation of stories about women’s representation in politics, on boards, in sports and entertainment, in judicial offices and in the private sector in the U.S. and around the world—with a little gardening and goodwill mixed in for refreshment!

This week:
—Rachel Entrekin makes history by setting a new course record at the Cocodona 250 ultramarathon, becoming the first woman to win the race outright.
—Amy Acton could become Ohio’s first woman governor.
—Mother’s Day has always been about women’s political power.

… and more.

The Supreme Court Gutted the Voting Rights Act. Women Will Pay the Price.

PUBLISHED 5/2/2026 by and

The Court didn’t strike down Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act—but it didn’t need to. By requiring proof of intentional discrimination, the majority has made it dramatically harder to challenge maps that dilute the voting power of communities of color. As Justice Elena Kagan warned, the provision is now “all but a dead letter.”

For the women elected from majority-minority districts, that shift is not abstract. These are the very districts that made their representation possible—and now, those districts are among the most vulnerable to being redrawn or erased.

The consequences were immediate. Within hours of the ruling in Louisiana v. Callais, Florida lawmakers advanced a new congressional map targeting majority-minority districts, including seats held by women.

In the 11 states most likely to face redistricting pressure, up to 36 such districts could be redrawn—12 of them currently represented by women.

As voting rights litigator Yael Bromberg explained, the Court is now effectively looking for a “smoking gun” of discrimination. Short of that, legislatures can redraw maps along partisan lines, even when the racial impact is clear.

The statute remains on the books, but its practical force does not. And what replaces it is not neutrality—it is discretion. State legislatures can choose which incumbents to protect and which to leave exposed, creating new opportunities to sideline women and weaken the political power of the communities that elected them.

What happens next will not hinge on another sweeping ruling, but on a series of decisions that are easier to overlook and harder to challenge—and that will determine, district by district, who gets to remain represented at all.

Inside Trump’s Effort to ‘Take Over’ the Midterm Election

PUBLISHED 4/13/2026 by and

In the final weeks of the 2020 election, as Donald Trump’s false claims of fraud intensified, a small group of federal officials found themselves in a windowless room at the Justice Department confronting a question that could test the limits of American democracy: Had the vote really been hacked?

The answer, delivered by cybersecurity experts and backed by the FBI, was clear: No. What had happened in Antrim County, Mich., was a clerical error, not a conspiracy.

Attorney General William Barr understood the truth, and also the cost of telling it. Days later, he would resign.

That moment—one of many in which career officials resisted pressure to overturn the election—helped preserve the outcome of the 2020 vote.

But as reporting shows, the people and institutional guardrails that held the line then have largely disappeared. Across the Justice Department, Homeland Security and beyond, dozens of officials have been pushed out or reassigned, replaced by loyalists—many with ties to efforts to reverse the last election—now positioned to influence how future ones are run.

With the 2026 midterms approaching and Trump openly calling for Republicans to “take over” the elections, experts warn the system faces an unprecedented stress test. What was once a series of last-minute efforts to overturn results has evolved into something more systematic: a reshaping of the federal government itself, one that some fear is designed to ensure elections go the president’s way.

Republicans Want Tougher Mail-In Voting Rules. SCOTUS Could Deliver.

PUBLISHED 3/24/2026 by

On March 24, the Supreme Court heard arguments in Watson v. the RNC, a case challenging whether states can count mail-in ballots that arrive after Election Day, if they were postmarked on or before Election Day. Mississippi—along with Washington, D.C., and 13 other states—currently allows this practice, which Republicans are seeking to block.

The Supreme Court’s conservative majority signaled like they’re going to agree with the Republican challengers.

In advance of this Supreme Court ruling, states can send out ballots earlier, expand early in-person voting, and remove requirements that you need an excuse to vote early or absentee.

Juliana Stratton’s Big Senate Win, Kristi Noem’s Next Steps and the Origins of Women’s History Month

PUBLISHED 3/21/2026 by

Weekend Reading on Women’s Representation is a compilation of stories about women’s representation in politics, on boards, in sports and entertainment, in judicial offices and in the private sector in the U.S. and around the world—with a little gardening and goodwill mixed in for refreshment!

This week:
—Illinois primaries feature a big U.S. Senate win for Juliana Stratton.
—The IPU/U.N. Women Report on Women in Politics presents a sobering global snapshot.
—Mississippi will remain the only state that has never sent a woman to the U.S. House.
—Ranked-choice voting is being used for student elections at over 100 colleges and universities.

… and more.

Women’s History Month: Looking Back on How Far We’ve Come and the Hill That Lies Ahead

PUBLISHED 3/6/2026 by

Weekend Reading on Women’s Representation is a compilation of stories about women’s representation in politics, on boards, in sports and entertainment, in judicial offices and in the private sector in the U.S. and around the world—with a little gardening and goodwill mixed in for refreshment!

This week:
—Primary season marks few advances for women.
—Donald Trump’s endorsements were overwhelmingly male, and they mattered.
—LA Charter Commission recommends ranked-choice voting.
—German women oppose online hate speech.

… and more.

FAQs About the SAVE America Act and Its Impact on Voters

PUBLISHED 3/2/2026 by and | UPDATED 3/25/2026 at 11:57 A.M. PT

As the SAVE America Act heads toward a Senate showdown, Republican leaders are preparing marathon debate sessions that could stretch late into the night. The legislation, backed by Trump, would require Americans to present documentary proof of citizenship, such as a passport or birth certificate, in order to register to vote in federal elections.

As the political fight intensifies, confusion about what the bill would actually require has spread widely online and across social media. Supporters describe the measure as a simple election-integrity policy, while critics warn it could create sweeping new barriers for millions of eligible voters who do not have ready access to the required documents—including many women whose current legal names may not match the names on their birth certificates after marriage.

To cut through the noise, Ms. has put together this guide to the SAVE America Act, answering common questions about what it would do and how it could affect your right to vote, including: Does a Real ID count? What if I can’t find my passport? And why are Trump and Republicans pushing so hard for this bill?