In a significant turnaround, the Wisconsin Supreme Court has reversed its stance on ballot dropboxes - making them legal again in a 4-3 ruling.
Two years ago, when conservatives controlled the court, the justices restricted the use of dropboxes. The ruling said they could only be placed in local election clerks' offices, and a voter had to return their own ballot in person. However, when Justice Janet Protasiewicz was elected last April, control shifted on the high court.
Nick Ramos, executive director of the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign, is pleased with the decision and said his organization has known all along dropboxes are safe and improve voting access.
"They are a way that the electorate can access our democracy when it isn't necessarily so convenient," Ramos argued. "For our health care workers, the rural community, single parents out there."
Conservative members of the Wisconsin Supreme Court were against reviewing the case, stressing the significance of upholding and respecting legal precedent.
Luke Berg, deputy counsel at the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty, condemned the ruling, calling it "one of the worst decisions from the court in recent memory." He is convinced it was political and not what he thinks a court should be doing.
"I think it's deeply ironic that the court announced, by judicial fiat, its policy preference on a voting issue on the same day that it issued an opinion praising separation of powers, and then violated those very principles in the other opinion it issued," Berg asserted.
Ramos maintained the decision to make ballot boxes more widely available sends a clear message not only to the people of Wisconsin but the entire country.
"Especially after the year we've had, with bringing new maps, after living under the extreme partisan gerrymander that we've lived under for over a decade," Ramos emphasized. "It's a message of hope."
Ramos added he is proud of the volunteers, activists and key organizations who worked to bring about the change.
Support for this reporting was provided by The Carnegie Corporation of New York.
get more stories like this via email
The 2024 presidential election has raised complex emotions for incarcerated Ohioans, many of whom are unable to vote but remain deeply engaged in political discussions.
As a group often left out of political discourse, their views on the election reflect a broader desire for involvement in decisions that directly affect their lives.
Nicole Lewis, engagement editor for The Marshall Project, talked about the findings of its new survey of Ohio's incarcerated population.
"Many of the people who oversee the system are elected officials, sheriffs, judges, district attorneys," Lewis observed. "and so incarcerated people have a really unique perspective on how well the people in those roles are executing their jobs."
The presidential election held particular significance this year, with concerns about criminal justice reform, sentencing policies and who can participate in elections. Despite limited news access, many voiced strong opinions about candidates, especially former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris, a former prosecutor.
Lewis noted the broader implications of the political divide, especially in how those inside view figures like Trump and Harris.
"Many, many people told us, 'How can I move forward?'" Lewis reported. "'How can I believe that society would want me back if they're so willing to cast Donald Trump aside and make his felony convictions a complete disqualification for public office?'"
While people in prison in Ohio may not have had the opportunity to vote in the 2024 election, advocates said their voices and perspectives are crucial to understanding the political landscape. Their insights, shaped by years behind bars, are particularly relevant as more individuals regain the right to vote upon release and the effects of their views could shape the future of both criminal justice reform and electoral engagement nationwide.
get more stories like this via email
Wisconsinites overwhelmingly voted 'yes' on a record number of school funding measures, according to a new Wisconsin Policy Forum study. The appeals essentially asked voters to increase their own property taxes to fund school operations across the state. Voters favored a record number 169 referendums, authorizing a record total of $4.4 billion in new funding for 145 school districts.
Denise Gaumer Hutchison, Northwest regional organizer with the Wisconsin Public Education Network, said districts are being forced to take their needs to the ballot box to fund gaps between prioritizing students and overdue bills.
"The first responsibility of our public schools across the state is to educate children and to take care of the kids and the families they serve, every single day," she said. "So, that means any available funds that public schools have they put toward educating children. And so, if that means a boiler has to be patched rather than replaced, that's what they're going to do."
Almost half of the state's 421 school districts passed a referendum in April or November. Hutchison blames the state for not adequately funding school priorities, from building maintenance, to student mental-health services. The state superintendent announced last week the proposed 2025-27 budget would include $4 billion more in spending for public schools.
Despite 78% of the ballot measures passing, Hutchson said the districts where voters turned them down are in dire need of support to keep their doors open. Regardless of whether taxpayers have children in public schools, she says, the focus should be on providing every Wisconsin student with a quality education.
"I want their experience in public schools to be as awesome as my 25 and 26-year-old's were. I want them to get to be able to participate in sports, in theater, in drama and DECA, and learn about the history of our state and our country, and think about what our state and our country can be," she continued.
The study found factors like inflation outpacing the state allocated per-student revenue limits, the loss of pandemic aid and staff competition in a tight labor market are all factors that contributed to the record number of referendums.
get more stories like this via email
The presidential vote was close in Nevada and with the results in, local organizations leaning more progressive believe the re-election of Donald Trump could put much of the progress made in the Silver State in jeopardy.
Shelbie Swartz, executive director of Battle Born Progress, said Nevadans should take Trump's campaign promises seriously. She called on leaders in Carson City and in Congress to "stand up for their constituents," whom she argued a Trump administration could target, from immigrants to people who identify as transgender.
"If your values change based on polling, if your willingness to fight for the dignity of all Nevadans does not extend to our transgender siblings, then those are not values," Swartz contended. "They're talking points drafted in pencil."
Swartz stressed she has faith in the Nevada Legislature to pass bills to uphold and protect the rights of Nevadans but added the biggest challenge will be seeing what can make it across Republican Gov. Joe Lombardo's desk. Last year, Lombardo, who endorsed Donald Trump, vetoed a record 75 bills passed by the Legislature's Democratic majority.
Trump campaigned on the idea of mass deportations and has doubled down on the threat since his win.
Leo Murrieta, executive director of the group Make the Road Action Nevada, said it is time for leaders who are ready to move beyond what he calls "fear-based policies," to advocate instead for immigration reform, including clearer, earned pathways to citizenship.
"It is time for leaders to see our community as an integral part of this country's fabric, not just a political talking point," Murrieta argued. "We are standing united with many other groups ready to resist any of the policies and any of the other threats that we're certainly going to face."
A new report from the American Immigration Council found a one-time mass deportation operation would cost the United States at least $315 billion to remove more than 13 million people.
Disclosure: Battle Born Progress - Institute for a Progressive Nevada contributes to our fund for reporting on Civic Engagement, Environment, Gun Violence Prevention, and Health Issues. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email