Election Law and the Midterms

Description 

This panel will discuss the impact of the Court’s recent election law decisions while previewing the cases currently on the Court’s docket and those likely to reach the Court in the near future. Specifically, the discussion will cover Mi Familia Vota v. Fontes, a closely watched pending case concerning federal voting rights protections and state election administration. The panel will also examine the Court’s role in resolving election-related emergency applications, with particular attention to the issues that may arise during the upcoming midterm election cycle.

Materials for the Panel 

News Articles 

• Supreme Court will hear Arizona case that could badly weaken key federal law protecting voter registration - Jim Saksa, Democracy Docket 
• The Supreme Court has left limited alternatives for protecting minority voting rights - Hansi Lo Wang, NPR 
• The U.S. Supreme Court Has Eviscerated the Voting Rights Act — What’s Next? - Madeline Greenberg, Campaign Legal Center 
• Push for state-level voting rights acts renewed after supreme court ruling - Rachel Leingang, The Guardian
• Election Administration Is the Midterms’ Hot Topic, Brian Webster - National Conference of State Legislatures
• Trump administration urges Supreme court to issue a decision in mail-in voting dispute - SCOTUSblog, Amy Howe
• Trump mail voting executive order on Supreme Court’s Radar - National Constitution Center, Scott Bomboy
• What Louisiana v. Callais Means for the Voting Rights Act - Harvard Kennedy School

Pending Case Materials 

 

Mi Familia Vota v. Fontes, 152 F.4th 1153 (9th Cir. 2025)

• Description: In Mi Familia Vota v. Fontes, civil rights groups challenge an Arizona law which would bar people who register to vote without documentary proof of citizenship from voting in the presidential election. The Republican National Committee and Arizona legislators argue that Congress does not have the authority to regulate presidential elections under the U.S. Constitution’s Elections Clause and that the state legislature is free to require documentary proof of citizenship for Arizona voters. The petitioners, on the other hand, argue that Congress draws its authority from both explicit and implicit powers, and that Arizona’s effort to impose additional registration requirements for the presidential election conflicts with the National Voter Registration Act’s requirement that states “accept and use” the standard federal voter registration form.
• Reading Materials: 
  • Principle Brief of Appellants (9th circuit court of appeals)
  • Reply Brief of Promise Arizona (Cross Appellants- Appellees) 
  • Petition for Writ of Certiorari
  • Brief for the United States as Respondent
  • Brief of respondents Mi Familia Vota in Opposition 

Case Law 

• National Senate Republican Committee v. Federal Election Commission (2026)
• Watson v. Republican National Committee (2026)
• Louisiana v. Callais (2026)

Executive Order 

• Executive Order 14399, Ensuring Citizenship verification and Integration in Federal Elections