Once considered the sacred cornerstone of democracy, voting rights in the United States are now under siege. If you thought the fight for the ballot box was won with the Voting Rights Act of 1965, think again. In a stunning display of progress in reverse, lawmakers across the country have been hard at work chipping away at the very mechanisms that ensure free and fair access to voting. And while civil rights activists are rolling up their sleeves to fight back, one can’t help but marvel at the sheer dedication some politicians have to making democracy as inconvenient as possible.
The recent surge of restrictive voting laws, combined with judicial decisions that have weakened protections under the Voting Rights Act, has created a new battleground for anti-fascist activism. This isn’t just about shuffling lines at polling places or tweaking mail-in ballot deadlines—it’s about whose voices are amplified in the democratic process and whose are systematically suppressed. For those who care about defending democracy, this is the front line.
The Latest Developments: A Slow-Motion Crisis
Voting rights in America are being reshaped by two competing forces: a wave of state-level restrictive laws and federal and judicial efforts to push back. Let’s start with the state legislatures, where democracy goes to die a slow death by a thousand cuts.
In the past two years, lawmakers in 40 states have introduced over 300 restrictive voting bills, with 79 of them passed into law by 2024.1 These laws include everything from stricter voter ID requirements to reduced early voting periods and limitations on mail-in ballots. Take Georgia’s Senate Bill 202, for example, which not only reduces the number of ballot drop boxes but also criminalizes handing out water to voters waiting in line.2 Because, clearly, democracy is best served when voters are dehydrated and demoralized.
Meanwhile, in Texas, Senate Bill 1 imposes new ID requirements for mail-in ballots and empowers partisan poll watchers to a degree that sounds less like oversight and more like intimidation.3 Over in Louisiana, lawmakers have gone all in, passing eight restrictive laws in 2024 alone.4 Apparently, they’ve decided that preserving democracy involves making it harder for people to vote in the first place.
On the federal level, the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act has been reintroduced in Congress and aims to restore key provisions of the Voting Rights Act of 19655 6 that were gutted by the Supreme Court in Shelby County v. Holder (2013).7 8 The Act would reinstate preclearance requirements for states with a history of discriminatory voting practices, ensuring federal oversight of changes to voting laws. But while this sounds like a promising step, let’s not forget that passing even the most basic protections in today’s Congress is about as easy as threading a needle during an earthquake.
Speaking of the courts, the picture is equally mixed. On one hand, recent decisions like Allen v. Milligan (2023) 9 upheld protections for minority voters, ruling that Alabama must redraw congressional districts to comply with the Voting Rights Act. On the other hand, rulings like Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee (2021) 10 have made it harder to challenge discriminatory laws, further narrowing the Act’s scope. It’s a legal tug-of-war, with democracy hanging on by a thread.
Three Alarming Trends You Need to Know
The Surge in Restrictive Laws
The numbers speak for themselves: 79 restrictive laws passed across the country in just two years.11 These aren’t minor tweaks; they’re significant barriers that disproportionately affect marginalized communities. Stricter voter ID requirements, reduced polling locations, and limits on mail-in voting have all been implemented with surgical precision. And while proponents claim these measures are about “election security,” the facts tell a different story. Numerous studies, including one from the Brennan Center for Justice, have repeatedly found that voter fraud is exceedingly rare—like, “you’re more likely to be struck by lightning” rare.12
So, why the rush to restrict voting rights? Perhaps it’s because some lawmakers have realized that when you can’t win elections fairly, the next best option is to change the rules of the game. Attempts have already been made to severely restrict voting rights in the name of “safer elections”. See SAVE Act 2025: How New Voter ID Laws Could Restrict Voting Rights | Analysis that almost made it into the “Big Beautiful Bill”.
Federal and Judicial Pushback
While the state-level onslaught continues, there have been critical efforts to push back. The John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act offers a glimmer of hope, aiming to restore federal preclearance and protect against discriminatory practices. But passing this legislation is no small feat in a hyper-partisan Congress where even agreeing on the color of the sky can feel like a battle.
The courts have also been a battleground. While the Supreme Court’s decision in Allen v. Milligan was a victory for minority voting rights, its earlier ruling in Brnovich v. DNC dealt a blow to the Voting Rights Act, making it harder to prove discrimination. Meanwhile, lower courts have stepped in to block some of the most egregious state-level laws, but the patchwork nature of these rulings means voting rights are largely dependent on geography.
Disproportionate Impact on Marginalized Communities
Here’s the thing about these restrictive laws: they don’t affect everyone equally. Communities of color, disabled voters, elderly voters, and rural communities are disproportionately impacted. For example, strict voter ID laws disproportionately disenfranchise Black and Latino voters,13 who are statistically less likely to possess the required forms of identification. Reduced polling locations and shorter voting periods make it harder for working-class voters to cast their ballots.
It’s a textbook case of disenfranchisement disguised as reform. And while these measures are often justified under the banner of “election integrity,” the reality is that they serve to entrench power at the expense of representation.
A New Frontline: The Role of Activists
Civil rights organizations like the ACLU, NAACP Legal Defense Fund, and Brennan Center for Justice are leading the charge to defend voting rights.14 Their efforts range from filing lawsuits to challenging discriminatory laws to educating voters about their rights. Grassroots campaigns are mobilizing to increase voter turnout among underrepresented groups and advocate for federal protections.
These campaigns are not without challenges. Disinformation campaigns, often targeting communities of color, are spreading false information about voting procedures 15 and eligibility, further complicating efforts to increase voter participation. In response, activists are deploying digital tools, peer-to-peer texting, and community organizing to counteract these tactics.
The Misinformation War
If restrictive laws weren’t enough, misinformation and disinformation have emerged as powerful tools in voter suppression. False claims about mail-in ballots, election dates, and voter eligibility have become rampant, often targeting communities of color and young voters. These campaigns sow confusion, discourage participation, and undermine trust in the electoral process.
Take the 2024 election, for example, when fabricated stories about polling places being closed in predominantly Black neighborhoods spread like wildfire on social media. Grassroots organizations have been working overtime to combat this disinformation, but the scale of the problem is daunting.
This raises critical questions: Should social media platforms bear greater responsibility for policing election-related disinformation? How can we ensure voters have accurate information without infringing on free speech? These are issues that demand attention as we head into the 2025 elections.
Conclusion
The fight for voting rights is far from over. In fact, it has become one of the most critical battles for the future of democracy in America. The rapid surge of restrictive laws, combined with a patchwork of judicial rulings, has created a landscape where access to the ballot is no longer guaranteed. For anti-fascist activists, this is the new front line—a place where the ideals of equity, representation, and justice must be defended against those who seek to undermine them.
The stakes couldn’t be higher. Voting is the foundation of democracy, the mechanism by which we hold power accountable. And yet, it’s being chipped away under the guise of “integrity.” If there’s one thing history has taught us, it’s that democracy doesn’t die in a single moment—it erodes gradually, one law, one ruling, one closed polling station at a time.
The question is: What are we going to do about it?