Latest stories

Public-sector union legislation and litigation five years after Janus

By Janie Valentine
In Newsletters
June 9, 2023 at 5:00 PM

Note: Today’s newsletter is the final edition of Union Station. We are so grateful for your readership over the past five years. Want in-depth reporting about federal courts, election policy, school board politics, and more? Check out and subscribe to Ballotpedia’s other newsletters here.

This month will mark the five-year anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2018 ruling in Janus v. AFSCME. In Janus, the Supreme Court held that public-sector unions may not require non-member employees to pay agency fees covering the costs of union activities, overturning precedent established in Abood v. Detroit Board of Education in 1977.

Ballotpedia began tracking public-sector union legislation ahead of the Janus decision. We started tracking public-sector union lawsuits a year later. Today, we’ll take a look at what we’ve seen over the last five years.

Public-sector union legislation five years after Janus

As we reported last month, state lawmakers have introduced more public-sector union bills in 2023 than any year since 2018. We’re currently tracking 236 pieces of legislation related to public-sector union policy. While this is our last edition of Union Station, we’ll continue tracking bills through the end of the year on Ballotpedia. 

Here’s an updated breakdown of the number of bills introduced and enacted since 2018:

And the breakdown by sponsor party: 

So far, 27 of the bills we’re tracking this year have been enacted. To see a list of all enacted bills, click here. Here is a sampling of seven enacted bills:

  • Arkansas SB473: Republican sponsorship. This bill prohibits school districts from deducting union dues or fees from teachers’ or classified employees’ pay.
  • Colorado SB111: Democratic sponsorship. This bill gives public employees the right to express views about union representation and workplace issues, engage in “protected concerted activity for the purpose of mutual aid or protection,” participate in the political process while not at work, and join or not join a union. It prohibits public employers from retaliating against employees for engaging in such activities.
  • Florida S0256: Republican sponsorship. This bill requires public employees who want to be union members to sign a membership authorization form including language specified in the bill. The bill requires unions to allow members to revoke membership at any time and prohibits public employers from collecting union dues from employees’ pay. The bill amends registration and renewal requirements for certified bargaining agents. Unions representing law enforcement officers, correctional officers, correctional probation officers, and firefighters are excepted from the provisions of the bill.
  • Kentucky SB7: Republican sponsorship, veto overridden. This bill prohibits public employers from deducting union dues or fees from public employee wages or assisting a union in collecting dues, fees, or related personal information.
  • Michigan HB4004: Democratic sponsorship. This bill repeals a section of law prohibiting public employees from being required to join or financially support a union. The bill stipulates, “[T]his act or any other law of this state does not preclude a public employer from making an agreement with an exclusive bargaining representative … to require as a condition of employment that all other employees in the bargaining unit pay to the exclusive bargaining representative a service fee equivalent to the amount of dues uniformly required of members of the exclusive bargaining representative.”
  • Tennessee SB0281: Republican sponsorship. This bill prohibits local education agencies from deducting union dues from employee wages.
  • Washington HB1200: Democratic sponsorship. This bill requires public employers to provide exclusive bargaining representatives with information including employee name, date of hire, contact information, and employment and salary information within 21 business days of hiring a new employee in the bargaining unit. Information for every employee in the unit must be sent to the exclusive bargaining representative every 120 business days.

Public-sector union litigation five years after Janus

Since 2019, we’ve tracked 191 federal lawsuits related to public-sector labor laws. Among the most common questions raised in these cases: 

  • Whether public-sector unions can be held liable for refunding agency fees paid before Janus; 
  • Whether public-sector unions may continue to collect union dues from an employee who leaves the union if there is a pre-existing agreement that membership or dues authorization may only be revoked during a certain window; 
  • Whether exclusive bargaining representation laws violate non-union members’ First Amendment rights; 
  • Whether mandatory bar association dues should be reconsidered in light of Janus.

We’ve also tracked lawsuits in which public-sector unions challenged state or federal laws.

The chart below depicts the number of lawsuits we’ve tracked by federal judicial circuit.

And here’s the current status of each of these cases: 

To view a spreadsheet with information about all of these cases, click here.

Supreme Court updates

Here’s what’s happened since last month with public-sector union cases appealed to the Supreme Court. 

What we’re reading

The big picture

Number of relevant bills by state

We are currently tracking 236 pieces of legislation dealing with public-sector employee union policy. On the map below, a darker shade of green indicates a greater number of relevant bills. Click here for a complete list of all the bills we’re tracking. 

Number of relevant bills by current legislative status

Number of relevant bills by partisan status of sponsor(s) 

Recent legislative actions

Below is a complete list of relevant legislative actions taken since our last issue.

  • California AB1: This bill would establish the “Legislature Employer-Employee Relations Act,” which would allow state legislative employees to organize and bargain collectively. The act would go into effect on July 1, 2024. 
    • Democratic sponsorship. 
    • Assembly Appropriations Committee hearing May 18, committee recommends “do pass as amended.” Read second time and amended, ordered returned to second reading May 18. Read second time, ordered to third reading May 22. Read third time, passed, ordered to the Senate May 25. In Senate, read first time, referred to Senate Rules Committee for assignment May 26. 
  • California AB504: As amended, this bill would stipulate that it is not against the law or cause for discipline for state or local public employees to refuse to enter the site of a labor dispute, refuse to perform work for an employer involved in a labor dispute, or refuse to cross a picket line.
    • Democratic sponsorship. 
    • Assembly Appropriations Committee hearing May 18, committee recommends “do pass.” Read second time, ordered to third reading May 18. Read third time, passed, ordered to the Senate May 31. Read first time in Senate, referred to Senate Rules Committee for assignment June 1.
  • California AB1484: This bill would require temporary public employees hired to perform similar work to that of permanent public employees to be included in the same bargaining unit as permanent employees, upon the union’s request. 
    • Democratic sponsorship. 
    • Assembly Appropriations Committee hearing May 18, committee recommends “do pass as amended.” Read second time and amended, ordered returned to second reading May 18. Read second time, ordered to third reading May 22. Read third time, passed, ordered to the Senate May 31. Read first time in Senate, referred to Senate Rules Committee for assignment June 1.  
  • California AB1672: This bill, called the “In-Home Supportive Services Employer-Employee Relations Act,” would stipulate that the state is the employer of record for individual in-home supportive services providers for collective bargaining purposes. The bill would stipulate procedures for collective bargaining.  
    • Democratic sponsorship. 
    • Assembly Appropriations Committee hearing May 18, committee recommends “do pass.” Read second time, ordered to third reading May 18. Read third time, passed, ordered to the Senate May 31. Read first time in Senate, referred to Senate Rules Committee for assignment June 1. 
  • California SB334: This bill would authorize the Public Employment Relations Board to include the effect of net-zero carbon emissions initiatives on public employees when conducting studies of employer-employee relations.
    • Democratic sponsorship. 
    • Senate Appropriations Committee hearing May 18, held in committee and under submission.
  • California SB716: This bill, which would enact the Excluded Employee Arbitration Act, would allow a union representing certain excluded employees to request binding arbitration in certain circumstances.
    • Democratic sponsorship.
    • Senate Appropriations Committee hearing May 18, committee recommends “do pass.” Read second time, ordered to third reading May 18. Read third time, passed, ordered to the Assembly May 25. In Assembly, read first time, held at desk May 25. 
  • Colorado SB111: This bill would give certain public employees the right to express views about union representation and workplace issues, engage in “protected concerted activity for the purpose of mutual aid or protection,” participate in the political process while not at work, and join or not join a union. It would prohibit public employers from retaliating against employees for engaging in such activities. It would stipulate that the Colorado Department of Labor and Employment is responsible for enforcement. 
    • Democratic sponsorship. 
    • Governor signed June 6, 2023.
  • Delaware SB72: As amended, this bill would allow union members to claim an itemized deduction for the annual cost of union membership, up to $500, with certain exceptions.
    • Democratic sponsorship.
    • Senate Substitute No. 2 introduced and adopted May 18. Senate passed May 18. Assigned to House Revenue & Finance Committee June 1. Reported out June 6, assigned to House Appropriations Committee June 7.  
  • Illinois HB0297: This bill would stipulate that either party to a collective bargaining agreement for educational employees prohibited from striking may submit disputes for arbitration. The bill would establish mandatory interest arbitration proceedings.
    • Democratic sponsorship. 
    • Assigned to Senate Executive Committee, hearing May 17. Committee reported favorably. Second reading May 17. Third reading deadline established as May 25 on May 19. 
  • Illinois HB1120: This bill would require certified charter school contract renewals to include a union neutrality clause stating that the school agrees to be “neutral regarding the unionization of any of its employees …,” to provide “labor organization access at reasonable times…,” and to recognize unions “through a majority card check verified by a neutral third-party arbitrator[.]”
    • Democratic sponsorship. 
    • Sent to the governor June 8. 
  • Maine LD1095: This bill would make an exception to the 10-day deadline for school administrative units and employee bargaining agents to meet for collective bargaining negotiations requested by the other party if there is a prior written contract agreeing otherwise, except that the bill would prohibit the enforcement of “explicit waivers of collective bargaining over wages, hours, working conditions and contract grievance arbitration.” 
    • Democratic sponsorship. 
    • Governor signed May 17, 2023.  
  • Maine LD1588: This bill would require public employers to provide personal contact information for all public employees to the union representing the bargaining unit within 30 days of a request from the union, up to four times a year, in addition to an existing requirement for public employers to provide unions with contact information for new employees.
    • Democratic sponsorship. 
    • House accepted “ought to pass as amended” report June 8. Read once, committee amendment read and adopted, read second time and passed as amended June 8 . 
  • Maine LD1636: This bill would stipulate that employees, including public employees, have the right to “refrain from paying any dues, fees, assessments or other similar charges, however denominated, of any kind or amount to a labor organization or to a 3rd party or charity in lieu of payment to a labor organization.” The bill would establish penalties and enforcement.
    • Republican sponsorship. 
    • Reported out of Joint Labor and Housing Committee June 2. Senate accepted “ought not to pass” report June 6, House accepted report June 8. Dead. 
  • Maine LD1707: This bill would strike language from multiple public employee labor statutes stating that “an employee may be required to pay to the organization that is the bargaining agent for the employee a service fee that represents the employee’s pro rata share of those expenditures that are germane to the organization’s representational activities.”
    • Republican sponsorship. 
    • Reported out of Joint Labor and Housing Committee June 2. House accepted “ought not to pass” report June 6, Senate accepted report June 7. Dead. 
  • Maine LD1922: This bill would allow “[t]wo or more bargaining agents who are certified by the executive director of the board and who are members or affiliates of the same public employee organization … [to] elect to merge.”
    • Democratic sponsorship. 
    • Joint Labor and Housing Committee hearing May 16. Work session held May 24, committee voted “ought to pass as amended.” Senate read and accepted report June 7. Read once, committee amendment read and adopted, read second time and passed as amended June 7.  
  • Maryland HB637 and Maryland SB428: These bills would allow sworn deputy sheriffs and correctional deputies at the rank of sergeant and below to bargain collectively with their employers. The bill would not authorize such employees to strike.
    • Democratic sponsorship. 
    • Governor signed May 16.
  • Maryland SB610: This bill would stipulate that a collective bargaining agreement covering teachers in a virtual school may include specific provisions accounting for the conditions and requirements of a virtual school. 
  • Michigan HB4230: This bill would allow public employees to have contributions for union political funds deducted from their wages.
    • Democratic sponsorship. 
    • House Labor Committee hearing May 11, referred to House Elections Committee. House Elections Committee hearing May 16. Reported with recommendation without amendment, referred to second reading May 16.
  • Michigan HB4234: This bill would remove certain campaign finance limitations for labor organizations. The bill would stipulate, “A labor organization may make an independent expenditure in any amount advocating for the election or defeat of a candidate, or the qualification, passage, or defeat of a ballot question and does not for this reason become a committee, but the labor organization is subject to the independent expenditure reporting requirements.”
    • Democratic sponsorship. 
    • House Elections Committee reported with recommendation with substitute May 16, referred to second reading.
  • Michigan SB0169: This bill would require public employers to provide certain contact information to the appropriate bargaining representative within 30 days of hiring a new employee. The bill would require public employers to provide each bargaining representative with certain employment and contact information for all public employees in the unit every 90 days.
    • Democratic sponsorship. 
    • Senate Labor Committee hearing May 18. Labor Committee reported favorably with substitute May 23, referred to Committee of the Whole. Committee of the Whole reported favorably with substitute June 7. Senate concurred in substitute June 7, passed June 8. House received, read first time, referred to House Labor Committee June 8.   
  • Michigan HB4582: This bill would only allow bargaining representatives to represent public employees for collective bargaining purposes who either voted for the bargaining representative or authorized the representation in writing.
    • Republican sponsorship.
    • Introduced, read first time, referred to House Government Operations Committee May 16. 
  • Michigan HB4584: This bill would make the payment of public-sector union dues and fees to an exclusive bargaining representative optional if an officer of the union or an officer of the union’s regional or national office is convicted of a felony “related to the finances of the exclusive bargaining representative.”
    • Republican sponsorship. 
    • Introduced, read first time, referred to House Government Operations Committee May 16. 
  • Michigan HB4587: This bill would implement certain campaign finance contribution limitations for labor organizations that would not apply if a specific set of provisions are included in state law, including, “No person shall by force, intimidation, or unlawful threats compel or attempt to compel any public employee to do any of the following … [b]ecome or remain a member of a labor organization or bargaining representative or otherwise affiliate with or financially support a labor organization or bargaining representative …” 
    • Republican sponsorship. 
    • Introduced, read first time, referred to House Government Operations Committee May 16. 
  • Minnesota HF3333: This bill would refer a question to the 2024 general election ballot about whether to add an article titled “Collective Bargaining Rights” to the Minnesota Constitution. In part, the amendment would state, “The people shall have the rights to organize together to form, join, or assist labor organizations, and to bargain collectively with a public or private employer through an exclusive representative of the employees’ choosing, to the fullest extent not preempted by the laws of the United States. … No existing or future law of the state or its political subdivisions shall impair, restrict, or limit the negotiation and enforcement of any collectively bargained agreement with a public or private employer respecting financial support by employees of their collective bargaining representative according to the terms of that agreement.” 
    • Democratic sponsorship.
    • Introduction and first reading, referred to House Labor and Industry Finance and Policy Committee May 19. 
  • Minnesota SF1384: Before being amended, this bill would have allowed public employees to authorize payroll deductions for union dues and union political fund contributions. It would have required public employers to provide exclusive representatives with certain personnel data within 20 days of hiring a new employee, and every 120 days for all employees. The bill would also have required public employers to allow exclusive representatives access to meet with new employees, to contact employees on employer-issued email addresses, and to meet in employer facilities. Provisions related to public-sector unions were removed before the bill was presented to the governor. 
    • Democratic sponsorship. 
    • Conference committee reported May 22. House and Senate adopted conference committee report and repassed May 22. Presented to governor May 23. Governor signed May 26. 
  • Missouri HB402: This bill would remove unions representing ambulance attendants, attendant drivers, and emergency medical technician paramedics from the definition of “public safety labor organization.”
    • Republican sponsorship. 
    • Signed by House speaker and Senate president pro tem, delivered to governor May 30. 
  • Nevada AB172: As amended, this bill would require every school district employer to provide recognized unions with certain contact information for all employees in the bargaining unit at least twice a year. 
    • Democratic sponsorship. 
    • Senate Government Affairs Committee hearing May 19. Committee reported favorably with amendment May 23. Read second time, amended May 23. Read third time, passed as amended May 25. Assembly concurred in Senate amendment May 30. Enrolled and delivered to governor May 31. 
  • Nevada AB224: This bill would authorize collective bargaining between State of Nevada Executive Department employers with 400 or more professional employees and those professional employees. The bill would provide for the designation of exclusive representatives and establish collective bargaining procedures. 
    • Bipartisan sponsorship. 
    • Assembly Ways and Means Committee hearing May 23. Committee recommended “amend, and do pass as amended” June 2. Read third time in Assembly, amended June 2. Assembly read third time, passed as amended June 3. Senate read first time, referred to Senate Finance Committee June 3. Senate Finance Committee hearing June 4. Committee recommended “do pass” June 4.  Senate read second time June 4. Senate read third time, passed June 5.   
  • Nevada SB251: This bill would include “policies for the transfer and reassignment” of school district employees who are not teachers as mandatory subjects of collective bargaining.
    • Democratic sponsorship. 
    • Assembly Education Committee hearing May 18. Committee reported favorably May 19. Read second time May 22. Read third time, passed May 26. In Senate, to enrollment May 26. Enrolled and delivered to governor May 29. Governor vetoed June 3. Special order of business in Senate June 5; no further consideration. 
  • Nevada SB264: As amended, this bill would stipulate that civilian employees of metropolitan police departments “may be a member of an employee organization only if such employee organization is composed exclusively of civilian employees of a metropolitan police department.” 
    • Democratic sponsorship. 
    • Assembly Government Affairs Committee reported favorably May 18. Read second time May 19. Read third time, passed May 23. Enrolled and delivered to governor May 26. Governor signed May 30. 
  • New Hampshire HB150: This bill would decrease the number of employees required to certify a public employee collective bargaining unit from 10 to five.
    • Motion to rerefer to committee failed, motion to lay on table adopted May 18. Pending motion inexpedient to legislate. 
  • New Hampshire SB193: This bill would stipulate that negotiating in good faith requires parties to meet for bargaining within 10 business days of receiving a written request, unless mutually agreed otherwise.
    • Bipartisan sponsorship. 
    • House Labor, Industrial and Rehabilitative Services Committee executive session May 25. Committee reported June 1: majority reported ought to pass with amendment, minority reported inexpedient to legislate. House adopted committee motion, adopted amendment June 8. 
  • Ohio HB151 and Ohio SB83: These bills would amend a list of public employees who are not allowed to strike to include all employees of public higher education institutions. 
    • Republican sponsorship. 
    • HB151: House Higher Education Committee hearing May 17. 
    • SB83: Senate passed May 17. Introduced in the House May 22. Referred to House Higher Education Committee May 23. House Higher Education Committee hearing May 24.
  • Oregon SB194: This bill would exclude certain Oregon State Police employees from being defined as supervisory employees for collective bargaining purposes.
    • Democratic sponsorship. 
    • Senate president and speaker of the House signed May 16. Enacted without governor’s signature. Effective date Jan. 1, 2024.
  • Pennsylvania HB950: This bill proposes the following amendment to the state constitution: “Employees shall have the fundamental right to organize and to bargain collectively through representatives of their own choosing for the purpose of negotiating wages, hours and working conditions, and to protect their economic welfare and safety at work. No law shall be passed that interferes with, negates or diminishes the right of employees to organize and bargain collectively over their wages, hours and other terms and conditions of employment and work place safety, including any law or ordinance that prohibits the execution or application of agreements between employers and labor organizations that represent employees requiring membership in an organization as a condition of employment.”
    • Democratic sponsorship. 
    • Referred to Senate State Government Committee May 15.
  • Pennsylvania SB720: This bill would expand collective bargaining rights for school administrators, applying existing collective bargaining rights to school administrators employed by a first-class school district in addition to administrators employed by a first-class city. 
    • Democratic sponsorship. 
    • Referred to Senate Labor and Industry Committee June 2. 
  • Rhode Island S0426: This bill would establish a dispute arbitration method for municipal employees. 
    • Democratic sponsorship. 
    • Senate read and passed May 11. Referred to House Labor Committee May 12. 
  • Tennessee HB0329 and Tennessee SB0281: As amended, these bills would prohibit local education agencies from deducting union dues from employee wages.
    • Republican sponsorship. 
    • Governor signed SB0281 May 16, effective July 1, 2023.
  • Texas SB736: This bill would establish mandatory binding interest arbitration for fire departments serving a municipality of at least 1.9 million people.
    • Democratic sponsorship. 
    • House read second time May 19. Read third time, passed May 22. Sent to governor May 25. Governor signed June 2. Effective immediately. 

Thank you for reading!



ICYMI: Top stories of the week

By Cory Eucalitto
In Newsletters
June 9, 2023 at 4:00 PM

Each week, we bring you a collection of the most viewed stories from The Daily Brew, condensed. Here are the top stories from the week of June 5-June 9.

Biden issued two executive orders in May on sanctions and coronavirus vaccine requirements

President Joe Biden (D) issued two executive orders in May, bringing his total to 115. President Donald Trump (R) had issued 109 executive orders at this point, President Barack Obama (D) had issued 86, and President George W. Bush (R) had issued 110. 

The two orders he issued last month were:

  1. Executive Order on Moving Beyond COVID-⁠19 Vaccination Requirements for Federal Workers (May 9, 2023)
  2. Executive Order on Imposing Sanctions on Certain Persons Destabilizing Sudan and Undermining the Goal of a Democratic Transition (May 4, 2023)

Read more

Marijuana legalization on Florida’s 2024 ballot pending state supreme court review

On June 1, state officials in Florida confirmed that Smart & Safe Florida, a campaign supporting a ballot initiative to legalize marijuana in the state, had submitted enough valid signatures to qualify for the 2024 ballot.

This measure would amend the state’s constitution to legalize marijuana for adults 21 years and older and allow the possession of up to three ounces of marijuana. If approved, Florida would become the 24th state to legalize marijuana for recreational usage. 

Whether the measure goes before voters next year depends on an upcoming state supreme court review required for all proposed initiatives under Florida law.

Read more

Eight states have withdrawn from the Electronic Registration Information Center (ERIC); Texas could become the ninth

A group of state election officials established the Electronic Registration Information Center (ERIC) in 2012 with financial assistance from the Pew Charitable Trusts. A multi-state voter list maintenance nonprofit, ERIC says its mission is “to help states improve the accuracy of America’s voter rolls, increase access to voter registration for all eligible citizens, reduce election costs, and increase efficiencies in elections.” 

States that join ERIC agree to share their voter registration and licensing and identification data from motor vehicle departments every 60 days. ERIC compiles this data and issues a series of voter list maintenance reports. 

At its height, 33 states were participating members in ERIC. The country’s four most populous states broke in different directions when it came to joining the organization—California and New York never joined while Florida and Texas did.

Louisiana became the first state to officially resign its membership in ERIC in July 2022. Seven other states, all with Republican governors, have withdrawn since. The Texas legislature recently sent a bill that would withdraw that state from the organization to Gov. Greg Abbott (R), which, if signed, would make Texas the ninth state to withdraw.

Read more



The Ballot Bulletin: Ballotpedia’s Weekly Digest on Election Administration, June 9, 2023

By Ethan Rice
In Newsletters
June 9, 2023 at 3:00 PM

States have enacted 182 election-related bills this year, 21 more than at this point in 2022.

Welcome to The Ballot Bulletin: Ballotpedia’s Weekly Digest on Election Administration. Every Friday, we deliver the latest updates on election policy around the country, including legislative activity, nationwide trends, and recent news. In each issue, you’ll find updates on legislative activity and recent news. 

Legislative highlights

Highlights:

  • States enacted eight bills during the past week. In the same week in 2022, states enacted 21 bills. 
  • States have enacted 182 bills in 2023. By this point in 2022, states had enacted 161 bills. 
  • Of the bills active over the past week, Democrats sponsored 63, a 97% increase from the 32 Democrat-sponsored bills state legislatures acted on the week before. Republicans sponsored 20 of the bills acted on this past week, a 33% decrease from the 30 Republican-sponsored bills state legislatures acted on the week before. 
  • The bill topics with the most legislative activity this week were contest-specific procedures (18), ballot access (13), absentee/mail-in voting (11), voter registration and list maintenance (10), and audits and oversight (10).

Recent activity and status changes

We’ve tracked the following election-related bills in 2023: 

  • 182 enacted bills (8 more than in our last edition)
  • 1 that has passed both chambers (-4)
  • 258 that have passed one chamber (+16)
  • 1,859 introduced bills (+3)
  • 264 dead bills (+3)

Enacted bills

States have enacted 182 election-related bills in 2023, compared to the 161 bills enacted at this point in 2022. Democrats sponsored 32 (17.6%), Republicans sponsored 114 (62.6%), and 20 (11%) had bipartisan sponsorship. Committees or legislators with independent or other party affiliations sponsored the remaining 16 (8.8%) bills. To see all bills approved this year, click here. 

Bills enacted since June 2, with their official titles, are listed below. 

Louisiana (Divided government)

  • LA HB496: Makes revisions to the Louisiana Election Code

North Carolina (Divided government)

  • NC H174: W-S/Forsyth Bd. of Ed./Rural Hall Even-Year
  • NC H99: Wake Co. Board of Comm. Elections

Oklahoma (Republican trifecta)

  • OK SB677: Declarations of Candidacy; requiring confidentiality of certain information; requiring submission of certain forms with declarations of candidacy for certain offices. Emergency.
  • OK SB266: Elections; increasing number of affected registered votes to establish a subprecinct. Effective date.
  • OK SB110: Career and technology education; directing a district with a certain number of electors to be divided into board zones. Effective date.
  • OK SB375: Elections; modifying date for certain elections; modifying filing period for declarations of candidacy. Emergency.

Texas (Republican trifecta)

  • TX SB1089: Relating to repealing the ability to declare certain unopposed candidates for office as elected.

Bills that passed both chambers

Two bills have passed both chambers (but are awaiting gubernatorial action) to date, compared to 59 bills that had passed both chambers at this point in 2022. To see all bills that have currently passed both chambers, click here.

Bills that passed both chambers since June 2, with their official titles, are listed below. 

Illinois (Democratic trifecta)

Oklahoma (Republican trifecta)

  • OK SB290: Conduct of elections; increasing compensation for certain election officials.

Vetoed bills

Governors have vetoed 21 bills this year, compared to 12 at this point in 2022. To see all bills that have been vetoed in 2023, click here.

Five bills have been vetoed since June 2. They are listed with their official titles below. (Note: SC H4413 was vetoed on May 18, with a House vote sustaining the governor’s veto on June 7.) 

Arizona (Divided government)

  • AZ SB1265: Voting; elections; tally; prohibition.

Nevada (Divided government)

  • NV SB133: Revises provisions relating to presidential electors. (BDR 24-539)
  • NV SB404: Makes various changes relating to elections. (BDR 24-843)
  • NV AB394: Revises provisions governing elections. (BDR 24-776)

South Carolina (Republican trifecta)

  • SC H4413: Bamberg County School District

Enacted bills by topic and sponsorship, 2022 vs. 2023

Recent activity by topic and sponsorship

The chart below shows the topics of the bills state legislatures acted on since June 2. Click here to see a full list of bill categories and their definitions.

* Note: Contest-specific procedures refers to primary systems, municipal election procedures, recall elections, special election procedures, and other systems unique to a particular election type. 

All 2023 bills by topic and sponsorship

The chart below shows the topics of a sample of the 2,585 bills we have tracked this year. Note that the sums of the numbers listed do not equal the total number of bills because some bills deal with multiple topics.  

Recent activity by state and trifecta status

Sixty-five (61.1%) of the 105 bills with activity this week are in Democratic trifecta states, 10 (9.5%) are in Republican trifecta states, and 30 (28.6%) are in states with divided governments. 

Of the 50 bills acted on in the same week in 2022, 20 (40%) were from states with Democratic trifectas, 10 (20%) were from states with Republican trifectas, and 20 (40%) were from states with divided governments.

The map below shows election-related bills acted on in the past week by state trifecta status.

All 2023 bills by state and trifecta status

Of the total bills introduced in 2023, 1,128 (43.6%) are in states with Democratic trifectas, 1,144 (44.3%) are in states with Republican trifectas, and 313 (12.1%) are in states with divided governments. 

Texas legislators have introduced the most election-related bills this year (389). Texas holds legislative sessions in odd years only, and so had no activity in 2022. The Texas Legislature is in a special session as of June 2, with the regular session adjourning on May 29. New York was the most active state at this point in 2022 with 417 bills introduced. Tennessee has enacted the most bills this year (17). In 2022, New York and California had enacted the most bills at this point. 

The map below shows the number of election-related bills introduced by state in 2023 by state trifecta status.

Recent news

Nevada Republicans challenge presidential primary system

On May 26, the Nevada Republican Party (NV GOP) filed a lawsuit challenging the state’s presidential primary system. AB126, which Gov. Steve Sisolak (D) signed in June 2021, changed Nevada’s presidential nomination process from a caucus to a primary. The NV GOP argued that the primary system “threatens to obstruct the rights of the NV GOP and Nevada citizens under the First and Fourteenth Amendments to freely associate.” The Party asked the court to prevent the secretary of state from enforcing AB126 and to allow state parties to select their own nominating procedures. If the request is denied, the Party asked to hold a caucus alongside a primary and assign delegates based on the caucus results. A NV GOP statement said “the Nevada Republican Party will never stop fighting for free and fair elections. We look forward to the precedent that political parties may decide their method of choosing their nominee being upheld in court.” Nevada State Democratic Party representative Mallory Payne said, “This is the GOP playbook at work – restrict voting access to limit as many voices as possible and change the rules if they don’t serve their interests. Democrats moved from a caucus to a presidential preference primary to simplify the process and make voting easier and more accessible. Republicans aren’t even trying that hard to hide their intentions – they’re doing whatever it takes to protect their MAGA leader and get Trump over the finish line.” While 2024 presidential election dates are still being set, Republicans in 46 states are expected to nominate presidential candidates through primary systems, with the remaining states using caucuses.  

Arizona Supreme Court will not hear mail-in voting lawsuit

On June 2, the Arizona Supreme Court rejected the Arizona Republican Party’s (AZGOP) challenge to the state’s mail-in voting laws. In May 2022, the AZGOP sued the state, arguing that the mail-in voting laws violated the state constitution’s provision that “secrecy in voting shall be preserved.” The Arizona Superior Court dismissed the suit in June, and the Arizona Court of Appeals upheld that ruling in January 2023. The Arizona Supreme Court justices did not explain their decision not to hear the case. In the appeals court ruling, Appellate Judge Cynthia Bailey said, “The Secrecy Clause’s meaning is clear: When providing for voting by ballot or any other method, the legislature must uphold voters’ ability to conceal their choices. The constitution does not mandate any particular method for preserving secrecy in voting.” State Rep. Alexander Kolodin (R) said, “Many voters are simply unable to protect themselves and can only vote freely in a system where they are not forced (e.g. in the case of domestic violence) to request a mail-in ballot only to be coerced and intimidated to vote in a certain way when marking their ballots.”



297 constitutional amendments were filed during the 2023 Texas legislative session with House Republicans filing the most

By Victoria Antram
In State
June 9, 2023 at 10:51 AM

Of the 297 constitutional amendments filed during the 2023 regular session, 184 amendments (62%) were filed by Republican senators or representatives, and 113 (38%) by Democratic legislators. Compared to the 2021 regular legislative session, Republicans filed 58 more amendments in 2023, and Democrats filed an additional 21.

Sen. Brian Birdwell (R-22) filed the most Republican-sponsored amendments with nine. Sen. Nathan Johnson (D-16) also filed nine amendments—the most Democratic-sponsored amendments.

The House filed 204 amendments (69%), and the Senate filed 93 (31%). Compared to the 2021 regular legislative session, the House filed 44 more amendments in 2023, and the Senate filed 35 more amendments.

Between 2009 and 2021, an average of 196 constitutional amendments were filed during regular legislative sessions. The state legislature approved an average of nine constitutional amendments during regular legislative sessions. Therefore, the average rate of certification during regular legislative sessions was 4.7%.

Of the 297 proposed amendments, 13 amendments were certified for the November ballot during the regular legislative session. This is a 4.4% certification rate of filed amendments.

In November, Texans will decide on amendments governing a wealth tax preemption, a constitutional right to farm, judicial retirement ages, and tax exemptions and government funds.



Acronyms abound…ICYMI—ERIC and state legislatures

By Samuel Wonacott
In Newsletters
June 9, 2023 at 6:00 AM

Welcome to the Friday, June 9, Brew. 

Here’s what’s in store for you as you start your day:

  1.  Eight states have withdrawn from the Electronic Registration Information Center since 2022; Texas is poised to become the ninth
  2. Burgum, Christie, and Pence announce presidential campaigns 
  3. #FridayTrivia: In the 14 states and D.C. where marijuana legalization was on the ballot and passed, what was the average yes vote?

Eight states have withdrawn from the Electronic Registration Information Center (ERIC) since 2022; Texas is poised to become the ninth 

On May 29, Texas lawmakers sent Senate Bill 1070 (SB 1070) to Gov. Greg Abbot (R), positioning the state to become the eighth to withdraw from the Electronic Registration Information Center (ERIC) this year, and the ninth since 2022. 

In case you have not been following the story, let’s dive into the background. 

A group of chief election officials in Colorado, Delaware, Maryland, Nevada, Utah, Virginia, and Washington established ERIC in 2012 with financial assistance from the Pew Charitable Trusts. A multi-state voter list maintenance nonprofit, ERIC says its mission is “to help states improve the accuracy of America’s voter rolls, increase access to voter registration for all eligible citizens, reduce election costs, and increase efficiencies in elections.” Because states run elections, there is no national list of voters. States that join ERIC agree to share their voter registration and licensing and identification data from motor vehicle departments every 60 days. ERIC compiles this data and issues a series of voter list maintenance reports. The organization also requires member states to contact eligible voters with voting registration information. 

At its height, 33 states were participating members in ERIC. The country’s four most populous states broke in different directions when it came to joining the organization—California and New York never joined While Florida and Texas did (the California Assembly is currently considering Assembly Bill 1206, which would require the secretary of state to apply for membership in ERIC).  

On July 13, 2022, Louisiana became the first state to officially resign its membership in ERIC, after previously suspending its participation in January. 

Since then, the following seven states have also withdrawn:

  • Alabama
  • Florida
  • Iowa 
  • Ohio
  • Missouri
  • Virginia
  • West Virginia

With the exception of Louisiana, which has a Democratic governor, every state that has withdrawn from ERIC has a Republican governor. 

Critics of ERIC include officials like Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose (R), who once defended the organization but now say it needs to enact reforms related to governance, data security, and member state requirements. LaRose said ERIC’s bylaws should be changed to no longer allow two non-voting members who are not government employees on the board of directors: “ERIC’s membership should only consist of member states, who answer to the voters and taxpayers they represent.” Objecting to a requirement that members regularly contact eligible but unregistered voters, LaRose also said members should be able to decide for themselves how best to use ERIC’s data. 

Ohio’s withdrawal from ERIC is effective June 16.   

Susan Beals, Virginia’s commissioner of elections, said that although Virginia was a founding member of the organization, “ERIC’s mandate has expanded beyond that of its initial intent—to improve the accuracy of voter rolls. We will pursue other information arrangements with our neighboring states and look to other opportunities to partner with states in an apolitical fashion.”

Not all Republican secretaries of state have opposed ERIC, however. Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger (R), for example, said, “states that prioritize best practices and actual election integrity over politics are going to stay in ERIC and have clearer and more accurate voter rolls than those that choose to leave.” 

Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson (D) said, “This entire controversy is fueled by easily debunked misinformation and a newfound desire by some member states wanting to opt out of sending eligible citizens information on how to register to vote.”

In an open letter responding to criticisms, ERIC Executive Director Shane Hamlin said, “We analyze voter registration and motor vehicle department data, provided by our members through secure channels, along with official federal death data and change of address data, in order to provide our members with various reports. They use these reports to update their voter rolls, remove ineligible voters, investigate potential illegal voting, or provide voter registration information to individuals who may be eligible to vote.”

The Texas Republican Party, which supported the state’s withdrawal from ERIC, said, “The ERIC membership agreement collects an extensive amount of personally identifiable information and data related to elections going far beyond the requirements of our Interstate Crosscheck Program.” State Sen. Bryan Hughes (R), who cosponsored the bill, said, “Now, there is no evidence that ERIC is doing anything to Texas voter rolls. But we do know that the people running ERIC do not share our worldview.” State Rep. Chris Turner (D) said: “I don’t understand why we have this bill before us, particularly when we know the data shows that ERIC has helped Texas identify duplicate registrations, and that’s exactly what we should be trying to do.”

Texas isn’t the first state in which the legislature has passed a bill that would affect membership in ERIC. On May 15, the Arizona Legislature sent Senate Bill 1135 (SB 1135) to Gov. Katie Hobbs (D), which Hobbs vetoed on May 26. The bill included provisions that would have effectively withdrawn Arizona from ERIC.

In the eight states that have withdrawn from ERIC so far, the chief election official made the decision without legislative input. 

So far this year, we’ve tracked 122 bills related to voter list maintenance. That figure is slightly less than the 159 introduced and tracked in 2022. Of those 122 bills, 10 have been enacted and two have been vetoed (including Arizona’s SB 1135). Click here to use our Legislation Tracker to follow bills in your state. 

Click below to learn more about ERIC.
Keep reading

Burgum, Christie, and Pence announce their presidential campaigns 

Let’s check in on the race to the White House, which is becoming ever more packed with candidates. Over the last week, three new noteworthy candidates announced 2024 presidential campaigns. Former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R) officially announced his candidacy on June 6, while former Vice President Mike Pence (R) and North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum (R) officially announced their candidacies on June 7.

There are now three noteworthy Democrats and 11 noteworthy Republicans running for president. Below is a summary of each candidate’s campaign activity from May 31 to June 7.

  • Joe Biden (D) commented on his signing of the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023 on June 4. The Democratic National Committee and Building Back Together, a group supporting Biden, released ads highlighting his handling of the negotiations.
  • Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (D) participated alongside Elon Musk and other guests in a live-streamed conversation on Twitter on June 5. Kennedy also campaigned in New Hampshire on June 1, where he spoke before the New Hampshire Senate, and visited Yuma, Arizona, on June 7.  
  • Marianne Williamson (D) wrote an op-ed for Newsweek titled “Debate Us, Mr. President,” on May 31. 
  • Doug Burgum (R) announced his presidential campaign on June 7 at an event in Fargo, North Dakota. 
  • Chris Christie (R) announced his presidential campaign on June 6 at an event at the New Hampshire Institute of Politics in Goffstown, New Hampshire.
  • Ron DeSantis (R) campaigned in South Carolina on June 2 and visited Sierra Vista, Arizona, on June 7.  Former Nevada Attorney General Adam Laxalt endorsed DeSantis on June 6.
  • Nikki Haley (R) participated in a CNN Town Hall on June 4. At the event, Haley commented on issues including the war in Ukraine, Medicare, and social security. Haley also spoke at the Connecticut Republican Party’s Prescott Bush Awards Dinner in Stamford, Connecticut, on May 31. 
  • Asa Hutchinson (R) participated in a televised WMUR town hall on May 31, and campaigned in Indianola, Iowa, on June 2. 
  • Mike Pence (R) announced his candidacy on June 7 at an event in Ankeny, Iowa. 
  • Vivek Ramaswamy (R) campaigned in New Hampshire on June 1 and 2, and attended an event in Garrett County, Maryland, on June 5. On June 4, Ramaswamy commented on the war on Ukraine during an interview with ABC’s Martha Raddatz. 
  • Tim Scott (R) wrote an op-ed for Fox News titled “America is a land of opportunity, not a land of oppression,” published on June 1. On June 2, Scott campaigned in Council Bluffs, Iowa, and on June 7, he released a new ad set to air in Iowa. Also, on May 31, Scott said he would vote against the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023. 
  • Donald Trump (R) released a policy memo on drug policy on June 1. That same day, he campaigned in Urbandale, Des Moines, and Grimes, Iowa, and participated in a televised Fox News town hall. On June 6, Trump released an ad criticizing Biden and Democratic members of Congress, among other government officials. On June 7, Politico reported that 50 members of the West Virginia Legislature signed a letter endorsing Trump.

In addition to the events above, DeSantis, Larry Elder (R), Haley, Hutchinson, Pence, Ramaswamy, and Scott attended a Roast and Ride event organized by Sen. Joni Ernst (R) in Des Moines, Iowa, on June 3.  

At this point in the 2020 cycle, 26 noteworthy candidates were running for president—24 Democrats and two Republicans. In the 2016 election, 14 noteworthy candidates had announced their campaigns as of June 7.

Learn more about the 2024 presidential race at the link below. 

Keep reading 

#FridayTrivia: In the 14 states and D.C. where marijuana legalization was on the ballot and passed, what was the average yes vote?

In the Wednesday Brew, we brought you a story about how voters in Florida could vote on legalizing marijuana in 2024—but only if the measure gets through a state supreme court review. 

Currently, 23 states and Washington D.C. have legalized the possession and personal use of marijuana for recreational purposes. This includes 16 states with Democratic trifectas, two with Republican trifectas, and five with divided governments. In 14 of those states and D.C., voters decided legalization measures at the ballot box.

What was the average yes vote in those 14 states and D.C.?

  1. 51%
  2. 67%
  3. 58%
  4. 71%


U.S. Supreme Court overturns Alabama’s congressional maps in Allen v. Milligan decision

By Joel Williams
In State
June 8, 2023 at 4:10 PM

On June 8, 2023, the United States Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that Alabama’s congressional redistricting plan adopted in November 2021 and used in the state’s 2022 elections violated the Voting Rights Act and must be redrawn to include a second majority-Black district.

In November 2021, a group of Alabama voters and organizations sued Secretary of State John Merrill (R) and the House and Senate redistricting chairmen, Rep. Chris Pringle (R) and Sen. Jim McClendon (R). Plaintiffs alleged the congressional map unfairly distributed Black voters. The plaintiffs asked the lower court to invalidate the enacted congressional map and order a new map with instructions to include a second majority-Black district.

In January 2022, the Northern District of Alabama granted an injunction preventing the state from using this plan for the 2022 U.S. House elections. In February 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court overruled the district court and allowed the state to use the maps to conduct its elections. That year, Alabama voters elected six Republicans and one Democrat to the U.S. House.

Two lower court cases were consolidated into this one: Milligan v. Merrill and Caster v. Merrill. The case changed names to Allen v. Milligan once Wes Allen (R) became Alabama Secretary of State in January 2023.

Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the majority opinion in Allen v. Milligan and was joined by Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, Brett Kavanaugh, and Ketanji Brown Jackson. Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, and Amy Coney Barrett formed the minority.

In his majority opinion, Roberts wrote, “The concern that §2 may impermissibly elevate race in the allocation of political power within the States is, of course, not new. See, e.g., Shaw, 509 U. S., at 657 (“Racial gerrymandering, even for remedial purposes, may balkanize us into competing racial factions; it threatens to carry us further from the goal of a political system in which race no longer matters.”). Our opinion today does not diminish or disregard these concerns. It simply holds that a faithful application of our precedents and a fair reading of the record before us do not bear them out here.”

In his dissent, Thomas wrote, “As construed by the District Court, §2 does not remedy or deter unconstitutional discrimination in districting in any way, shape, or form. On the contrary, it requires it, hijacking the districting process to pursue a goal that has no legitimate claim under our constitutional system: the proportional allocation of political power on the basis of race. Such a statute “cannot be considered remedial, preventive legislation,” and the race-based redistricting it would command cannot be upheld under the Constitution.”

Additional Reading: 



Trump leads in 2024 Republican presidential primary polling and PredictIt markets

By Joseph Greaney
In 2024 elections
June 8, 2023 at 3:17 PM

As of June 8, 2023, former President Donald Trump (R) leads in both RealClearPolitics’ (RCP) Republican presidential primary polling average and PredictIt’s Republican presidential primary market.

Trump’s polling average currently stands at 53 percent, followed by Florida Governor Ron DeSantis (R) at 22 percent. No other candidate has more than a 10 percent polling average. In PredictIt’s Republican primary market, Trump’s share price is $0.54, and DeSantis’ share price is $0.31. Both candidates share price has come down slightly from last week. No other candidate has a share price at or above $0.10. 

A candidate’s polling average reflects an estimate of the vote share a candidate would receive if the election took place today, while a PredictIt share price roughly corresponds to the market’s estimate of the probability of a candidate winning the election.

President Joe Biden (D) leads both RCP’s Democratic primary polling average and PredictIt’s Democratic primary market. Biden has a 59 percent polling average, with no other candidates polling at or above 10 percent, and a $0.75 PredictIt share price. One other candidate, California Governor Gavin Newsom (D), has a share price at or above $0.10. Newsom stands at $0.15.

Biden, DeSantis, and Trump are the only candidates of this group to have officially announced their presidential campaigns.

Additional reading:



Burgum, Christie, and Pence announce their presidential campaigns

By Juan Garcia de Paredes
In 2024 elections
June 8, 2023 at 3:03 PM
Image of the south facade of the White House.

Three new noteworthy candidates announced 2024 presidential campaigns in the past week. Former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R) officially announced his candidacy on June 6, while former Vice President Mike Pence (R) and North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum (R) officially announced their candidacies on June 7. 

There are now three noteworthy Democrats and 11 noteworthy Republicans running for president.

Below is a summary of each candidate’s campaign activity from May 31 to June 7.

  • Joe Biden (D) commented on his signing of the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023 on June 4. The Democratic National Committee and Building Back Together, a group supporting Biden, released ads about his handling of the negotiations.
  • Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (D) participated alongside Elon Musk and other guests in a live-streamed conversation on Twitter on June 5. Kennedy also campaigned in New Hampshire on June 1, where he spoke before the New Hampshire Senate, and visited Yuma, Arizona, on June 7.  
  • Marianne Williamson(D) wrote an op-ed for Newsweek titled “Debate Us, Mr. President,” on May 31. 
  • Doug Burgum (R) announced his presidential campaign on June 7 at an event in Fargo, North Dakota. 
  • Chris Christie (R) announced his presidential campaign on June 6 at an event at the New Hampshire Institute of Politics in Goffstown, New Hampshire.
  • Ron DeSantis (R) campaigned in South Carolina on June 2 and visited Sierra Vista, Arizona, on June 7. Former Nevada Attorney General Adam Laxalt endorsed DeSantis on June 6.
  • Nikki Haley (R) participated in a CNN Town Hall on June 4. At the event, Haley commented on issues including the war in Ukraine, Medicare, and social security. Haley also spoke at the Connecticut Republican Party’s Prescott Bush Awards Dinner in Stamford, Connecticut, on May 31. 
  • Asa Hutchinson (R) participated in a televised WMUR town hall on May 31, and campaigned in Indianola, Iowa, on June 2. 
  • Mike Pence(R)announced his candidacy on June 7 at an event in Ankeny, Iowa. 
  • Vivek Ramaswamy (R) campaigned in New Hampshire on June 1 and 2, and attended an event in Garrett County, Maryland, on June 5. On June 4, Ramaswamy commented on the war on Ukraine during an interview with ABC’s Martha Raddatz. 
  • Tim Scott (R) wrote an op-ed for Fox News titled “America is a land of opportunity, not a land of oppression,” published on June 1. On June 2, Scott campaigned in Council Bluffs, Iowa, and on June 7, he released a new ad set to air in Iowa. Also, on May 31, Scott said he would vote against the the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023. 
  • Donald Trump (R) released a policy memo on drug policy on June 1. That same day, he campaigned in Urbandale, Des Moines, and Grimes, Iowa, and participated in a televised Fox News town hall. On June 6, Trump released an ad criticizing Biden and Democratic members of Congress, among other government officials. On June 7, Politico reported that 50 members of the West Virginia Legislature signed a letter endorsing Trump.

In addition to the events above, DeSantis, Larry Elder (R), Haley, Hutchinson, Pence, Ramaswamy, and Scott attended a Roast and Ride event organized by Sen. Joni Ernst (R) in Des Moines, Iowa, on June 3.  

At this point in the 2020 cycle, 26 noteworthy candidates were running for president. Twenty-four were seeking the Democratic nomination, and two (Trump and former Massachusetts Governor Bill Weld) were seeking the Republican nomination.

Notable stories at the time included fourteen Democrats speaking at the California Democratic Party state convention between May 31 and June 2, and former Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan (R) announcing he would not run for president on June 1. 

In the 2016 election, 14 noteworthy candidates had announced their campaigns as of June 7, 2015. There were four Democrats and 10 Republicans.

Additional reading:



Donor Privacy and Disclosure Digest: June 2023

By Ethan Rice
In Newsletters
June 8, 2023 at 3:00 PM

Welcome to Ballotpedia’s Donor Privacy and Disclosure Digest! This monthly newsletter provides news and information on key policy changes, a breakdown of state legislation, and an overview of pivotal legal decisions and case developments. In this issue, you’ll find:

  • Missouri Legislature passes bill amending privacy act: The Missouri General Assembly approves modifications to the state’s Personal Privacy Protection Act.
  • In the courts: The latest on pivotal judicial decisions and developments across the country.
  • State by state: An analysis of this month’s state legislative activity, including bill status, topic, partisan sponsorship, and more. 
  • What we’re reading: Keep up to date on the stories and analyses we’ve been reading this month.
  • Dig deeper: Want more information on the topics covered in this issue? We’ve got you covered.

Missouri Legislature passes bill amending privacy act

On May 10, the Missouri General Assembly passed SB28, a bill modifying provisions of the state’s Personal Privacy Protection Act. Under the Act, government agencies are prohibited from disclosing information identifying a person as a member, supporter, or donor to a nonprofit organization. The bill now heads to Gov. Mike Parson (R) for consideration.

The Personal Privacy Protection Act was enacted through HB2400. Rep. Dan Houx (R) introduced the bill, which was originally related to retirement and welfare benefits plans, on Jan. 11, 2022. The state House passed the bill unanimously on April 4, and the state Senate passed an amended version 27-6 on May 6, with 10 Democrats and 17 Republicans voting for the bill. Rep. Jered Taylor (R) offered an amendment to the bill containing the Personal Privacy Protection Act on May 12. Taylor said the act would “protect an individual’s right or ability to donate to a cause that they believe in.” The amended legislation received bipartisan support in the House, with 28 Democrats and 101 Republicans voting in favor of the bill on May 12. Parson signed the bill into law on June 30. Five other states, Georgia, Indiana, New Hampshire, New York, and Virginia, also enacted donor privacy laws in 2022.

SB28 would allow government agencies to disclose information with the written permission of all individuals who might be identified through the release. It also specifies that the Personal Privacy Protection Act does not prevent the disclosure of donor information contained in a financial interest statement. It creates additional exceptions to the Act for information disclosed as part of a legal investigation and records nonprofits submit to obtain government contracts. 

SB28 originally focused on regulating access to public records of the Missouri Highway Patrol. Sen. Justin Brown (R) introduced the bill on Jan. 4, 2023, and the Senate passed it on Feb. 3. Lawmakers added the provisions relating to donor privacy on May 1, and the bill passed the House of Representatives on May 10. 

The General Assembly considered two other bills modifying Missouri’s privacy laws this year.  Rep. Sean Pouche (R) introduced a bill that would have changed the Personal Privacy Protection Act, HB667, on Jan. 5, 2023. Rep. Ben Baker (R) introduced the other bill, HB1064, on Feb. 7. Neither bill passed both chambers of the legislature. HB667 advanced from committee on March 21 but was not scheduled for a floor vote before the state’s legislative session ended on May 12. HB1064 passed the House on April 11 and was referred to committee in the Senate, but did not advance.

Supporters of SB28 say it allows the state to effectively partner with nonprofits while still protecting donor privacy. Opponents say the original law does not need modifications. Office of Administration representative Chris Moreland said the bill is a compromise that would “allow the state to continue conducting business and partnering with nonprofits while maintaining protections around donor privacy.” Jeremy Cady, state director for Americans for Prosperity, said the issue was with the interpretation of the existing act under the current administration, not with its language: “A number of states have passed similar laws. We haven’t seen these issues in other states. So we’re not entirely sure why this has become as much of an issue as it has been.” 

Missouri has a Republican trifecta, meaning Republicans control both legislative chambers and the governor’s office. Republicans have a 24-10 majority in the Missouri Senate and a 111-52 majority in the Missouri House of Representatives. 

In the courts

Groups sue New York attorney general over donor records

Nonprofit groups Empire Center and New Yorker’s Family Research Foundation (NYFRF) filed a lawsuit against New York Attorney General Letitia James (D) on May 16. The groups alleged James’ office improperly received IRS documents containing nonprofit donor information, including donors’ names and addresses. Plaintiffs also cited the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Americans for Prosperity v. Bonta, which held that requiring donors’ names and addresses violated the First Amendment. The Empire Center’s president and CEO Tim Hoefer said, “For years, the Attorney General’s Charities Bureau wrongfully collected confidential donor information, and we now know that data hasn’t been kept secure. The Attorney General’s actions, or lack thereof, since the leaks have shown she has no plan to stop violating donors’ First Amendment rights, leaving us with no option but to take her to court to enforce the law.” James has not commented on the lawsuit, but said in October 2022 that her office had conducted an internal investigation into potential disclosures of donor information. 

State by state

Since May 3, state legislatures have acted on 15 donor privacy and disclosure bills, down from the 16 bills acted on last month. These 15 bills represent 28.8% of the 52 bills we are tracking in 2023. Eight of these bills are from states with Democratic trifectas, five are from states with Republican trifectas, and two are from states with a divided government. In comparison, we tracked 51 bills at this point in 2022 and 40 bills at this point in 2021. Click here for a complete list of all the bills we’re tracking.

5 bills were introduced (or had pre-committee action).

  • Democratic trifectas: 3
  • Republican trifectas: 2

1 bill advanced from committee

  • Democratic trifectas: 1

6 bills passed one chamber (or had pre-adoption action in the second chamber). Those bills, with their official titles, are listed below. 

  • Democratic trifectas: 4
    • CA SB724: Political Reform Act of 1974: communications.
    • CT SB01058: An Act Concerning The Attorney General’s Recommendations Regarding Consumer Protection And Financial Reporting By Charitable Organizations.
    • IL HB1197: CHARITY ORG-SOLICIT REPORT
    • NY S06863: Relates to reporting requirements of SUNY and CUNY; relates to financial information and identifying vendor information of each contract; relates to a list of all foundation and state university employees by campus, department and location including salaries, job titles and descriptions.
  • Republican trifectas: 1
    • NH HB195: Relative to the definition of political advocacy organization.
  • Divided governments: 1
    • NV AB258: Enacts certain provisions governing the confidentiality of certain personal information of a donor, member or volunteer of a nonprofit organization. 

2 bills passed both chambers. Those bills, with their official titles, are listed below. 

  • Republican trifectas: 1
    • AL HB184: Relating to charitable organizations; to amend Section 13A-9-71, Code of Alabama 1975, to prohibit the imposition of certain filing or reporting requirements on certain charitable organizations.
  • Divided governments: 1
    • NV AB52: Makes various changes to the Open Meeting Law. 

1 bill was enacted. Those bills, with their official titles, are listed below.  

  • Divided governments: 1
    • IN HB1212: Privacy of nonprofit donor information.

The charts below show bill progress by state trifecta status and compare tracked legislation by legislative status and partisan sponsorship in 2022 and 2023. 

What we’re reading

Keep up with the latest events in the world of donor privacy and disclosure policy by exploring the stories linked below. 

Dig deeper

Are you hungry for more information on the topics we covered in this edition? Check out the following Ballotpedia pages:



Tuesday’s election results roundup: One incumbent loses in New Jersey, and Denver gets a new mayor

By Juan Garcia de Paredes
In Newsletters
June 8, 2023 at 6:00 AM

Welcome to the Thursday, June 8, Brew. 

Here’s what’s in store for you as you start your day:

  1. Tuesday’s election results roundup: One incumbent loses in New Jersey, and Denver gets a new mayor
  2. On this date in 1976: Ohio voters approved the Ohio Joint Election of Governor and Lieutenant Governor Amendment
  3. A roundtable of Ballotpedia reporters discuss highlights from this year’s state legislative sessions in the latest episode of On the Ballot

Tuesday’s election results roundup: One incumbent loses in New Jersey, and Denver gets a new mayor 

New Jersey held municipal and statewide legislative primaries on Tuesday, while Denver, Colorado, held a runoff election for mayor. Let’s dive into the key results:

One incumbent defeated in New Jersey’s state legislative primaries

Seventeen incumbents faced contested primaries on Tuesday, and all but one advanced to the general election. 

Democratic Sen. Nia Gill lost her primary, representing 1.1% of the 93 incumbents running for re-election. Overall, 76 incumbents, or 82% of the total running for re-election, didn’t face primary challengers and were guaranteed to advance to the general election. 

It is uncommon for New Jersey legislative incumbents to lose in primaries. 

From 2011 to 2017, no incumbents lost in primaries. In 2019, one Republican incumbent lost. A decade-high three incumbents lost primaries in 2021. 

Gill’s defeat comes in the state’s only incumbent v. incumbent primary, where she faced fellow incumbent Richard Codey (D). The two ended up in the same district following redistricting, guaranteeing at least one would lose.

Both incumbents were long-standing members of the Senate. Gill assumed office in 2002 and Codey in 1982. Codey is running unopposed in the November general election.

Click here to learn more about state legislative incumbents defeated so far in 2023. 

New Jersey is one of four states holding state legislative primaries in 2023, and the first to do so this year. 

The next state legislative primary date is June 20 in Virginia, where 17 incumbents are running in contested primaries, including two incumbent v. incumbent primaries.

Mississippi will hold its state legislative primaries on Aug. 8, followed by Louisiana on Oct. 14.

HDCO-endorsed incumbents advance in Hudson County

In Hudson county, a slate of candidates who received endorsements from the Hudson County Democratic Organization (HCDO) defeated a slate who received endorsements from the Progressive Democrats of Hudson County (PDHC) in the six contested Democratic primaries for the board of commissioners.

Five of the Democratic primaries had an incumbent, and one was for an open position. The HCDO endorsed all five contested incumbents as well as Robert Baselice in the open race. None of the six PDHC endorsees were incumbents, including Stephanie Martinez running in the open race.

The HDCO is the county-level affiliate of the state Democratic Party, and the PDHC is the county-level affiliate of the Progressive Democrats of New Jersey. 

No district had contested Republican primaries.

Additionally, HDCO-endorsed candidate Craig Guy defeated PDHC-endorsed Eleana Little in the Democratic primary for county executive. Guy is running unopposed in the November general election. Incumbent Thomas Degise (D), in office since 2002, did not seek re-election. 

Elsewhere in New Jersey, Essex County held primaries for county surrogate and its board of commissioners. Click here to view those results. 

Johnston defeats Brough in Denver’s mayoral runoff

In Colorado, former State Sen. Mike Johnston (D) defeated former Denver Metro Chamber of Commerce Kelly Brough in the runoff election for Denver mayor. As of this writing, Johnston had 56% to Brough’s 45%. 

Johnston and Brough advanced from a field of 22 candidates in the April 4 general election. Incumbent Michael Hancock (D), first elected in 2011, was term-limited. This was Denver’s fifth open mayoral election since 1959.

Ahead of the general election, Denverite’s Kyle Harris wrote that Brough and Johnston were “centrist candidates … [who] cleaved toward the middle, offering an optimistic vision while gently pushing for using policing in their homelessness solutions.” 

Both candidates highlighted public safety, homelessness, and housing affordability as key issues in this race.

Johnston’s endorsers included U.S. Rep. Brittany Pettersen (D), former Mayor Federico Peña, and a number of local unions. Brough’s endorsers included Gov. Bill Ritter (D), the Denver Police Protective Association, and the Denver Republican Party.

While the election was officially nonpartisan, Brough and Johnston are both Democrats.

We previewed this race in our May 30 edition. Click here to read more. 

Keep reading

On this date in 1976: Ohio voters approved the Ohio Joint Election of Governor and Lieutenant Governor Amendment

Earlier this week, we told you about a historical ballot measure of note—Prop 13 on June 6. Today let’s explore another measure in our database, this time from Ohio. 

Forty-seven years ago today, Ohio voters approved the Ohio Joint Election of Governor and Lieutenant Governor Amendment, a constitutional amendment providing that the lieutenant governor and governor run as a joint ticket in general elections.

The amendment also removed the lieutenant governor’s duty to preside over the state Senate and gave the General Assembly the power to determine the method for nominating the lieutenant governor and governor. 

Before the amendment’s implementation, Ohio’s governors and lieutenant governors were elected separately, which could result in officeholders from different parties. This happened 10 times in the 20th century, including in 1970, when Democrat John J. Gilligan was elected governor, and Republican John W. Brown was elected lieutenant governor.

In 1971, the Constitutional Revision Commission, a body created to suggest revisions to the state constitution, recommended “the Governor and the Lieutenant Governor be elected as a team, and that the General Assembly provide by law for the joint nomination of candidates for Governor and Lieutenant Governor.” The commission stated the change would “strengthen the executive role of the Lieutenant Governor and, by requiring political harmony between the two offices, insure continuity of public policy in the event of an abrupt transition of government.”

Gilligan and Brown both testified in favor of the change. Addressing the commission, Gilligan said:

“[…] It is the constitutional responsibility of the Lt. Governor to assume the duties of the Governor if the latter dies or becomes disabled. A close working relationship between the Governor and Lt. Governor will substantially ease the problems of the gubernatorial transition. I am certain that a Lt. Governor of the Governor’s own party will play a major role in much of the discussion and decision making process in the Governor’s office and will, therefore, be better equipped in an emergency to take over the duties of the State’s Chief Executive.”

Following the commission’s recommendation, the Ohio General Assembly referred the amendment to the ballot. Voters approved the measure 61% to 39% on June 8, 1976. 

The amendment’s approval didn’t take place in time to prevent the same situation from happening one last time, though. In the 1974 general election, two years before the amendment’s approval, both Gilligan and Brown lost to challengers from the opposing parties: Gilligan to Republican James Rhodes and Brown to Democrat Richard Celeste.

Today, Ohio is one of 26 states in which the lieutenant governor is selected on a ticket with the governor. 

In 18 of these states, including Ohio, gubernatorial candidates may pick their own running mates in a similar fashion to presidential candidates. In the remaining eight states, there are separate primaries for governor and lieutenant governor, with the winning candidate in each primary appearing on the general election ticket.

The lieutenant governor is elected separately from the governor in 17 states. In Tennessee and West Virginia, the title of lieutenant governor is given to the president of the state Senate.

Arizona was the last state to approve a measure to make the governor and lieutenant governor appear on a joint ticket. On Nov. 8, 2022, voters approved Proposition 131 55% to 45%. The measure created the position of lieutenant governor and provided that it should be elected on a joint ticket with the governor, beginning in 2026. Currently, Arizona is one of five states—alongside Maine, New Hampshire, Oregon, and Wyoming—where the position of lieutenant governor doesn’t exist. 

As of June 7, Louisiana, North Carolina and Vermont are the only states where the lieutenant governor and the governor are from different parties. Louisiana and North Carolina both have Democratic governors and Republican lieutenant governors, while Vermont has a Republican governor and a Democratic lieutenant governor. 

Keep reading 

A roundtable of Ballotpedia reporters discuss highlights from this year’s state legislative sessions in the latest episode of On the Ballot

On the Ballot, our weekly podcast, takes a closer look at the week’s top political stories.

In this week’s episode, host Victoria Rose and a roundtable of Ballotpedia’s reporters discuss highlights and trends from this year’s state legislative sessions as they begin to wind down. Among the topics they discuss is the increase in election-related legislative activity this year. States have enacted 175 election-related bills so far in 2023, compared to 156 at this point in 2022. Republicans sponsored more of the bills enacted this year than last, while the number of Democrat-sponsored bills has remained nearly the same.

Interested? Tune in! Episodes of On the Ballot come out Thursday afternoons, so if you’re reading this on the morning of June 8, you’ve still got time to subscribe to On the Ballot on your favorite podcast app before this week’s episode comes out!

Don’t miss out on the latest content! Click below to listen to older episodes and find links to where you can subscribe.
Keep reading