Voting in the New York primary election begins next Tuesday, and ahead of the kickoff, a new voting-rights bill has been signed into law this week.

The John R. Lewis Voting Rights Act of New York includes many measures from the federal bill of a similar name that was passed by the U.S. House but got held up in the Senate.

Melody Lopez, executive director of the New York State Civic Engagement Table, said the bill restores pre-clearance, where jurisdictions with a history of voter discrimination are required to get any changes to their election code reviewed.

She noted it also expands language access, protects against voter intimidation and includes tools to combat voter suppression and dilution.

"This is really creating a model for the nation in terms of how states can respond to the whittling away of voting-rights law at the federal level," Lopez asserted. "And also just kind of a model to rebut some of the suppressive voting laws that have passed in other parts of the country."

She added the bill would create a central public repository for election and demographic data to promote transparency and evidence-based best practices for elections.

Lopez added big changes to New York's election code are long overdue, pointing out there has been a persistent participation gap between white and BIPOC voters across the state.

"That is a reflection of discriminatory practices historically, like racial gerrymandering, at-large elections that dilute minority voting strength especially in local jurisdictions across the state," Lopez outlined. "It can be hard to access inconveniently located polling locations, language-assistance failures; just a whole litany of practices."

Lopez acknowledged voter turnout in New York has traditionally been low, and urged residents to get registered to vote and be sure to cast a ballot in this year's primary, either in-person on Election Day, in-person early, or by mail-in ballot. Early voting begins next Tuesday and continues for two months, through August 23.

Support for this reporting was provided by The Carnegie Corporation of New York.

Democrats, Republicans and other political parties in Utah hold primary elections Tuesday, and advocates for older voters are promoting the importance of making sure their voices are heard.

Each party will choose its candidates for the Nov. 8 midterm elections.

Danny Harris, director of advocacy for AARP Utah, said some critical issues are coming up, both in the Utah Legislature and Congress, but the ballots will also be full of candidates for state supreme and appellate court justices, county and city officers, school boards and local ballot measures.

"There's a lot of issues that are particularly important to 50-plus voters, especially right now," Harris outlined. "With rising prices, people struggling to pay for groceries and gas, dealing with the pandemic and a retirement savings crisis."

People over 50 typically turn out to vote in large numbers. Harris urged them to study their local issues to make informed choices. Nonpartisan information is online at Vote.Utah.gov and at AARP.org/UTvotes. Voters can also contact their county elections office.

Harris pointed out voters can still fill out and send a mail-in ballot no later than Monday, or they can vote at their local precinct on Election Day. He said in-person voters should be ready to show identification.

"You must provide at least one valid primary form of ID that includes your name and photograph," Harris explained. "Or you can provide two forms of ID that, when those two combine, they show your name and a current address."

Harris added each political party in Utah has its own ballot, and some but not all, limit voting to only members of the party.

"The Republican, Constitution and Libertarian parties require voters to be affiliated with their respective parties," Harris noted. "But the Democratic, the United Utah, and the Independent American Party primaries are open. In the General Election, however, voters use the same ballot."

Voters who have questions or need assistance should contact election officials at their precinct. Polls will be open on Election Day from 7 a.m. to 8 p.m., or until everyone in line by 8 p.m. has cast a ballot.

July 1 is the next scheduled hearing date for a pair of lawsuits tied to North Dakota's redistricting process. The legal issue is political boundaries for tribal areas, and whether their federal rights are being honored.

One lawsuit alleges the state violated the Voting Rights Act by not creating a majority Native American legislative district for the Spirit Lake and Turtle Mountain reservations. The other case seeks to protect a newly created subdistrict encompassing the Fort Berthold reservation.

Staff Attorney Michael Carter of the Native American Rights Fund said he feels the law is on their side, noting recent federal activity in the first case.

"The U.S. Department of Justice Department filed a statement of interest in the case," said Carter, "taking our position against the state."

The position is that the Voting Rights Act affords citizens the ability to assert their legal rights in these situations. The state disagrees and has sought to dismiss the case filed by tribal nations.

The competing suit, brought by GOP officials, argues it was unconstitutional for the state to consider race when creating the subdistrict for Fort Berthold.

Lisa DeVille, who resides on the Forth Berthold reservation, has been part of the legal efforts on behalf of tribal members.

She said lawmakers were right to establish the subdistrict in that region and bolster the voting power of Natives, and notes it's an area often overlooked by the state.

"The only time these people come to visit us is when they want our vote," said DeVille. "Not ever seeing what we deal with, what we need, our needs, our wants."

DeVille, who is now running for House District 4A in the State Legislature, said maintaining the subdistrict could pave the way for more candidates who better reflect the interests of tribal voters.

Meanwhile, the GOP plaintiffs in the case have indicated they'll take their arguments to the U.S. Supreme Court. They're appealing the denial of a preliminary injunction they sought ahead of last month's primary election.

On the heels of Tuesday's removal of South Dakota's attorney general, a political expert says it appears lawmakers followed through on what voters were hoping for.

In a legislative trial, the state Senate found Attorney General Jason Ravnsborg guilty of impeachment charges tied to a 2020 fatal crash. He was also forced to step down and was barred from seeking future office in the state.

Lisa Hager is an assistant professor of political science at South Dakota State University. She said the outcome reflects recent public polling from her department.

"Roughly 70% of South Dakota voters wanted Ravnsborg impeached and removed from office," said Hager. "So, it seems as if government here in South Dakota is following the will of the voters."

Ahead of the impeachment process, the situation drew widespread attention over Ravnsborg's actions following the crash, and whether he tried to mislead investigators.

Ravnsborg's defense argued his actions amounted to human error, and that the law-enforcement probe ultimately resulted in traffic misdemeanors. But Hager said there's a different threshold in a political trial.

The votes were not unanimous, but Hager said she feels it was still a pretty convincing result, noting the GOP controlled Legislature overcame party infighting to convict a fellow Republican.

Moving forward, she said it doesn't appear any follow-up action is needed to regain public trust.

"I think there is probably a higher trust in government with respect as to how this incident was handled," said Hager.

This week's final vote marked the first time a statewide official in South Dakota was impeached and removed from office.