State legislatures enact more than 200 election-related bills in first four months of 2026

Welcome to the Tuesday, May 12, 2026, Brew.

By: Lara Bonatesta

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

State legislatures enact more than 200 election-related bills in first four months of 2026
Virginia Supreme Court overturns redistricting referendum, preserving 2021 congressional map
Trump has appointed 37 federal judges so far this term, the second fewest among second-term presidents since Clinton

State legislatures enact more than 200 election-related bills in first four months of 2026

States have enacted 236 election-related bills so far this year, 66% more than at this point in 2024 and nearly two-and-a-half times the total from 2022.

These figures come from Ballotpedia's State of Election Policy 2026 Spring Report, which covers election-related legislative activity captured in our Election Administration Legislation Tracker through April 24 of this year.

Those 236 bills were enacted across 34 states. Republican trifecta states enacted the most bills, accounting for 53.4% of all bills enacted. Democratic trifectas accounted for 37.7% of all enacted bills, while 8.9% were enacted in states with divided governments.

At this same point in the 2024 session, states had enacted 142 election-related bills. In 2022, 96 election bills had been enacted.

As of April 24, legislators had introduced 4,427 election-related bills and resolutions — nearly as many as were introduced in all of 2025. Democratic trifecta states introduced the most legislation, accounting for 42.8% of all bills introduced. Republican trifectas accounted for 36.6% of all introduced bills, while 20.6% were introduced in states with divided governments.

At this same point in the 2024 session, states had introduced 2,149 election-related bills. In 2022, legislators had introduced 1,434 election bills.

Lawmakers across the country have considered election-related bills related to each of the 127 election legislation categories Ballotpedia covers. Legislators have given particular attention to seven noteworthy policy topics.

The administration of absentee/mail-in voting

All states allow for some form of absentee/mail-in voting. Fourteen states require voters to provide a valid excuse to vote absentee/by mail. Twenty-eight states allow any eligible voter to cast an absentee/mail-in ballot. Eight states have automatic mail-in ballot systems, also known as all-mail voting systems.

No states have made changes relevant to these broader categories this year, though legislators enacted 16 laws that changed elements of the absentee/mail-in voting process. Notable bills enacted include Mississippi HB 908 and Virginia SB 58 and HB 82. Click here and here to see our coverage of these bills.

Lawmakers in 40 states have introduced 330 bills and resolutions related to absentee/mail in-voting. These bills address different elements of the absentee/mail-in voting process, including how and when voters can request and return an absentee/mail-in ballot, when election officials must mail ballots, and deadlines and procedures for curing problems with an absentee/mail-in ballot.

Regulations governing law enforcement presence near polling places

Ten states have introduced or advanced 22 bills or resolutions concerning the presence of law enforcement, National Guard members, or immigration authorities at or near election sites.

The majority of the bills would prohibit law enforcement personnel from being within a set distance of polling places, tabulation sites, or election offices.

The only bill enacted on this issue to date was New Mexico’s SB 264. Click here to see our Daily Brew coverage of that bill.

Changes to how primary elections are run

Currently, 14 states require open primaries, 13 require closed primaries, 10 require semi-closed primaries, five require top-two style primaries, and in 11 states parties have discretion to choose participation rules for their primaries.

No states have enacted changes to these broader categories via legislation this year, but six states have enacted laws changing a primary date or how primaries are administered. Notable bills enacted include Arizona HB 2022 and Rhode Island S 2147. Overall, legislators have introduced 167 bills related to primary elections.

Policies prohibiting or authorizing the use of ranked-choice voting

In 2026, two states with Republican trifectas, Indiana and Ohio, enacted legislation prohibiting the use of ranked-choice voting (RCV).

Virginia, meanwhile, became the first state since 2023 to approve legislation, SB 176, that allows or requires the statewide use of RCV for state or local elections. Click here to see our Ballot Bulletin coverage of SB 176.

Seven states have laws authorizing or requiring the use of RCV for certain elections, while 19 states have laws prohibiting or restricting its use.

In total, lawmakers have introduced 67 bills related to RCV. Forty-seven of those would authorize or require the use of RCV in at least some elections, while 20 would prohibit or repeal RCV.

Mid-decade redistricting

Indiana, Maryland, and Virginia considered mid-decade redistricting in their 2026 regular sessions, with Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, and Tennessee meeting in special session to consider redistricting. On April 21, Virginia voters approved a legislatively-referred constitutional amendment that would have enacted new maps. The Virginia Supreme Court nullified the amendment vote on May 8. (See our story below for more details.)

Changes to voter ID requirements

Thirty-six states require voters to present identification to vote at the polls on election day, but many states have exceptions to these rules. Of these states, 24 require voters to present identification containing a photograph, with certain exceptions, and 12 states do not explicitly require photo identification. The remaining 14 states do not generally require voters to present identification in order to vote at the polls on election day.

None of the 14 states without voter ID requirements have advanced bills in 2026 to require it. And no state that allows non-photo identification has enacted legislation to require photo identification.

However, nine states have enacted bills modifying existing voter ID requirements. Notable enacted bills include Florida HB 991 and New Hampshire HB 323. Oklahoma SJR 47 would place the state’s existing voter ID requirement in the state constitution if approved by voters in August. Click here, here, and here to see our past coverage of those bills.

Legislators have introduced 196 bills related to voter ID. In 2025, there were 279 such bills, more than in 2024, 2023, or 2022.

Policies related to voter registration

Legislators in 44 states have introduced 602 voter registration bills, accounting for 13% of all bills introduced this year. Overall, 29 bills have been enacted related to voter registration.

These bills change various aspects of the voter registration process, including creating documentary proof of citizenship requirements, changing the data sources election officials are required to use for voter list maintenance, and expanding automatic voter registration systems.

A notable focus for state legislators was bills requiring documentary proof of citizenship for voter registration. Twelve states have laws requiring proof of citizenship to register to vote in at least some cases.

In 2025, Wyoming was the only state to enact a requirement that voters provide documentary proof of citizenship when registering to vote. In 2026, four states enacted new proof of citizenship requirements or expanded existing laws. Those bills were Florida HB 991, Mississippi SB 2588, South Dakota SB 175, and Utah HB 209. Click here to see our Ballot Bulletin coverage of those bills.

Ballotpedia publishes three reports each year that provide ongoing coverage of legislative activity affecting election administration. Click here to see our past reports.

Virginia Supreme Court overturns redistricting referendum, preserving 2021 congressional map

On May 8, the Virginia Supreme Court voided and nullified the election results for the April 21 redistricting amendment that voters approved 51.5% to 48.5%. The ruling blocks the amendment, which would have allowed the Virginia General Assembly to implement a new congressional map ahead of this year's midterm elections. The proposed map would have shifted four Republican-held districts to be more Democratic, based on the 2025 gubernatorial election results.

The 4-3 ruling said that the results of the measure were void because the General Assembly violated procedural requirements when placing the measure on the April 21 ballot.

Specifically, the case addressed Article XII, Section 1, of the Virginia Constitution, which says that a general election for the House of Delegates must occur between the two legislative sessions in which the General Assembly puts a constitutional amendment on the ballot. The Court found that the amendment was unconstitutional because legislators approved it after voting had started for the 2025 House of Delegates elections.

In the majority opinion, Justice Arthur Kelsey wrote, “In this case, voting in the general election for the House of Delegates began on September 19, 2025, and ended on Election Day, November 4, 2025. The General Assembly voted for the first time to propose the constitutional amendment to the electorate on October 31, 2025. By that date, over 1.3 million votes had been cast in the general election, which was

approximately 40% of the total vote for that election cycle.”

Justices Teresa Chafin, Stephen McCullough, and Wesley Russell, Jr. joined Kelsey in the majority. Chief Justice Cleo Powell and Justices Thomas Mann, and Junius Fulton III dissented.

The General Assembly elected Kelsey and McCullough to the court when Republicans controlled both chambers. Fulton was elected when Democrats controlled both chambers. Mann, Powell, and Russell were elected when Democrats controlled the Senate and Republicans controlled the House.
Chafin was elected when Republicans controlled the Senate, and Democrats controlled the House.

Virginia is one of two states in which state legislators elect justices to the Supreme Court. Justices serve 12 year terms. For more on how Virginia chooses its state judges, click here.

In response to the ruling, Democrats, including House of Delegates Speaker Don Scott (D), Attorney General Jay Jones (D), filed a motion asking the Virginia Supreme Court to pause the ruling and stating their intent to appeal the case to the U.S. Supreme Court.

According to Cardinal News and the Election Law Center at the College of William & Mary, before this year, the Virginia Supreme Court had overturned a ballot measure election result at least once before.

In 1956, Arlington, Virginia voters approved a local referendum which asked, “Shall county bond issues be subject to approval of a majority of the voters who are freeholders (as well as a majority of the voters) of the county voting in the election?” In other words, the measure restricted bond referendums to only property owners. In 1958, the Court ruled that the measure was unconstitutional.

Nationally, state supreme courts have overturned 11 statewide ballot measures in the last 20 years. These included:

Redistricting context

Virginia’s current congressional delegation has a 6-5 Democratic to Republican majority. Based on the 2025 Virginia gubernatorial election results, the proposed map would have shifted four Republican-held congressional districts to be more Democratic.

So far eight states — California, Florida, Missouri, North Carolina, Ohio, Tennessee, Texas, and Utah — have implemented new congressional maps ahead of the 2026 midterms. Six of those states implemented new maps voluntarily. Ohio was required to implement new maps by law, and a court ordered Utah to implement new maps. Not including Virginia, there are three states – Alabama, Georgia, and Louisiana – with maps subject to change due to litigation. Before 2025, only two states had conducted voluntary mid-decade redistricting since 1970.

Click here to learn more about the Virginia Supreme Court’s Ryan T. McDougle, et al. v. Don Scott, et al. ruling.

Trump has appointed 37 federal judges so far this term, the second fewest among second-term presidents since Clinton

President Donald Trump (R) has appointed, and the Senate has confirmed, 37 Article III federal judges through May 1 of the second year of his second term in office. This is the second-fewest Article III judicial appointments through this point in all presidents’ second terms since President Bill Clinton (D). Presidents in this group (Clinton, George W. Bush (R), Barack Obama (D), and Trump) have appointed an average of 50 judges, through May 1 of the second year of their second term.

Article III judges include judges on the U.S. Supreme Court, U.S. courts of appeal, U.S. district courts, and the U.S. Court of International Trade.

By May 1 of the second year of his second term, Obama had the most appointees confirmed with 73. Clinton had the second most with 58. President George W. Bush (R) had the fewest confirmations with 33.

The only president to have appointed a Supreme Court justice by this point of his second term was George W. Bush, who appointed two.

Presidents have made an average of 10 U.S. Court of Appeals appointments. Obama appointed the most, with 15, and Trump appointed the fewest, with six.

Presidents have appointed an average of 39 U.S. District Court judges. Obama appointed the most, with 56, and George W. Bush appointed the fewest, with 22.

Click here to read more about Trump’s judicial appointments and here to read more about past presidents' judicial appointments.