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—an agency that Congress specifically established to be bipartisan and independent—to 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 ºìÐÓÊÓƵ and co-counsel filed a lawsuit to block the Executive Order as an unconstitutional power grab.
Status: Ongoing
View Case
Learn ºìÐÓÊÓƵ Fighting Voter Suppression
All Cases
77 Fighting Voter Suppression Cases
Montana
Sep 2025
Fighting Voter Suppression
Montana Federation of Public Employees v. Montana
Representing Western Native Voice and four sovereign tribal nations in Montana, the ºìÐÓÊÓƵ, ºìÐÓÊÓƵ of Montana, and Native American Rights Fund (NARF) challenged the latest in a line of Montana laws that hinder Native American participation in the state’s electoral process — SB 490, which drastically limits access to Election Day voter registration (EDR) in Montana. These laws violate a number of provisions in the Montana Constitution: the right to vote, equal protection, and due process.
Explore case
Montana
Sep 2025
Fighting Voter Suppression
Montana Federation of Public Employees v. Montana
Representing Western Native Voice and four sovereign tribal nations in Montana, the ºìÐÓÊÓƵ, ºìÐÓÊÓƵ of Montana, and Native American Rights Fund (NARF) challenged the latest in a line of Montana laws that hinder Native American participation in the state’s electoral process — SB 490, which drastically limits access to Election Day voter registration (EDR) in Montana. These laws violate a number of provisions in the Montana Constitution: the right to vote, equal protection, and due process.
Iowa
Aug 2025
Fighting Voter Suppression
Selcuk v. Pate
Just two weeks out from the November 2024 presidential election, Iowa Secretary of State Paul Pate issued a directive to county clerks to challenge more than 2,000 voters at the polls on Election Day and force them to vote a provisional ballot that will count only if the voter can prove their citizenship.
The Secretary’s list of more than 2,000 voters does not adequately account for Iowans who have recently become U.S. citizens through naturalization, and thus risks disenfranchising scores of eligible voters based on national origin. The Secretary’s eleventh-hour gambit violates several provisions of the U.S. Constitution and federal law, and we have thus filed emergency suit to enjoin the directive.
Explore case
Iowa
Aug 2025
Fighting Voter Suppression
Selcuk v. Pate
Just two weeks out from the November 2024 presidential election, Iowa Secretary of State Paul Pate issued a directive to county clerks to challenge more than 2,000 voters at the polls on Election Day and force them to vote a provisional ballot that will count only if the voter can prove their citizenship.
The Secretary’s list of more than 2,000 voters does not adequately account for Iowans who have recently become U.S. citizens through naturalization, and thus risks disenfranchising scores of eligible voters based on national origin. The Secretary’s eleventh-hour gambit violates several provisions of the U.S. Constitution and federal law, and we have thus filed emergency suit to enjoin the directive.
Texas
Aug 2025
Fighting Voter Suppression
OCA-Greater Houston v. Paxton
Texas has growing Hispanic and Black populations that helped propel record voter turnout in the November 2020 election. The Texas Legislature responded to this increased civic participation with an omnibus election bill titled Senate Bill 1—SB 1 for short—that targeted election practices that made voting more accessible to traditionally marginalized voters like voters of color, voters with disabilities, and voters with limited English proficiency. Since 2021, SB 1 has resulted in tens of thousands of lawful votes being rejected, and it remains a threat to democracy in Texas.
Explore case
Texas
Aug 2025
Fighting Voter Suppression
OCA-Greater Houston v. Paxton
Texas has growing Hispanic and Black populations that helped propel record voter turnout in the November 2020 election. The Texas Legislature responded to this increased civic participation with an omnibus election bill titled Senate Bill 1—SB 1 for short—that targeted election practices that made voting more accessible to traditionally marginalized voters like voters of color, voters with disabilities, and voters with limited English proficiency. Since 2021, SB 1 has resulted in tens of thousands of lawful votes being rejected, and it remains a threat to democracy in Texas.
Pennsylvania
Aug 2025
Fighting Voter Suppression
Eakin v. Adams County Board of Elections (Amicus)
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. We're fighting to make sure that every vote counts
Explore case
Pennsylvania
Aug 2025
Fighting Voter Suppression
Eakin v. Adams County Board of Elections (Amicus)
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. We're fighting to make sure that every vote counts
Montana
Aug 2025
Fighting Voter Suppression
Chippewa Cree Indians of the Rocky Boy's Reservation v. Chouteau County
Representing the Chippewa Cree Indians of the Rocky Boy’s Reservation and two Native American voters living in Chouteau County, Montana, the ºìÐÓÊÓƵ, ºìÐÓÊÓƵ of Montana, and Native American Rights Fund (NARF) challenged the holding of at-large elections for the Chouteau County Board of Commissioners. The suit alleges the system unlawfully dilutes the voting strength of Native American voters in the county and has denied them any representation on the county commission for more than a decade.
Explore case
Montana
Aug 2025
Fighting Voter Suppression
Chippewa Cree Indians of the Rocky Boy's Reservation v. Chouteau County
Representing the Chippewa Cree Indians of the Rocky Boy’s Reservation and two Native American voters living in Chouteau County, Montana, the ºìÐÓÊÓƵ, ºìÐÓÊÓƵ of Montana, and Native American Rights Fund (NARF) challenged the holding of at-large elections for the Chouteau County Board of Commissioners. The suit alleges the system unlawfully dilutes the voting strength of Native American voters in the county and has denied them any representation on the county commission for more than a decade.