This week: N.Y.C. Open Primaries Challenge Moves Ahead in State Court; US Loses Challenge Seeking NY Voter Lists; New Law Gives New York State Legislature the Ability to Write Ballot Language for Referenda on Constitutional Amendments; Citizens Budget Commission Looks at New York’s Population; Around The Nation
LITIGATION
N.Y.C. Open Primaries Challenge Moves Ahead in State Courts
Former Mayor Eric Adams appointed the so-called “zombie” NYC Charter Revision Commission on his final day in office, with its main agenda focused on open primaries. On May 27, Mayor Mamdani disbanded the Commission, using new authority included in the state budget.
On Monday June 29, members of the Commission and Republican City Council Member Vickie Paladino, former Governor David Paterson, and Staten Island Borough President Vito Fossella, filed suit against the governor, mayor, the NYC Board of Elections, and the city clerk in Richmond County Supreme Court.
On July 13, respondent-defendants filed a motion to dismiss the plaintiffs’ complaint and Article 78 petition. They argued that 1) the rights of the Commissioners were not violated by the nullification of the Commission because they do not have a property interest in their former offices and Mayor Mamdani disbanding the Commission nullified the appointments and the open primary ballot proposal, 2) the Commissioners lack standing because their claims of economic harm are too speculative, and 3) the non-Commissioner plaintiffs lack standing because their claims are based on personal views.
Only July 15, plaintiffs filed a memo of law in opposition to the defendant’s motion to dismiss.
The plaintiffs argued that 1) the provision used to the nullify the Commission was a special law that was targeted to impact New York’s home rule rights, specifically written to target one commission, and was not subject to any State interest exception, 2) the Commissioners have a right to reimbursement for costs associated with their service, and 3) the non-Commissioner plaintiffs have standing to challenge an action made by the legislature themselves.
Simultaneously on June 30, the commission filed a petition for preclearance as required by the state voting rights act, in New York County Supreme Court seeking to determine that the open primary proposal did not dilute minority voting strength so the proposal could be placed on the November 2026 General Election ballot for NYC voters to decide.
On July 9, New York City Corporation Counsel Steven Banks filed a memo of law on behalf of the city, mayor, city clerk, and NYC Board of Elections, arguing that
1) the Court should hold a joint trial in New York County because it is the only venue where the preclearance petition can be heard, thus there are special circumstances,
2) Mastro should be disqualified because Rule 1.11 of the Professional Code prohibits him from representing the plaintiffs because he was involved in the formation of the commission, and
3) the Court should stay the proceedings in the matter until a determination on the motions are made.
On July 15, plaintiffs filed a memo in opposition to the City’s arguments, claiming that
1) a joint trial of both the New York County and Richmond County cases is improper because they deal with different facts & legal issues, and would cause unnecessary delay,
2) Mastro should not be disqualified because he sought and received advice from the City’s Conflicts of Interest Board who confirmed there was no conflict.
On July 16, after a hearing for the plaintiffs to show cause about the issues of a joint trial and disqualifying Mastro and Dechert LLP as counsel, the Manhattan Supreme Court ruled to
1) not join the Richmond County case with the New York County case because there are significant differences between the parties, underlying facts, and legal issue, and the issue is timely because the Commission’s ballot proposal must be transmitted by August 3 to the City Board of Elections to appear on the ballot in November,
2) not disqualify Mastro as counsel for the Commission because the City did not demonstrate that Mastro “received specific confidential information substantially related to the present litigation”, and 3) vacate the stay against any actions.
As reported by PoliticoNY, the Manhattan Supreme Court temporarily blocked the effort to disqualify Mastro, however the judge “passed along the issue to the Staten Island Court, where a judge is expected to issue a conclusive ruling on that particular matter later this week.”
The NYC Corporation Counsel is filing an appeal to the Manhattan Supreme Court’s decision. The next hearing on the merits will be held on July 27.
ELECTION LITIGATION
Voter Rolls: United States vs. New York Board of Elections
In June 2025, the U.S. Department of Justice requested New York’s compliance in turning over sensitive voter information, including dates of birth, partial Social Security numbers and driver’s license numbers.
New York was one of 30 states that the DOJ filed suit against for refusing to turn over their voter rolls.
On July 10, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York dismissed the DOJ’s lawsuit finding that 1) the DOJ stated no basis or purpose for ascertaining the voter rolls and lacked any relation to the purpose for the enactment of Title III of the Civil Rights Act, and 2) Congress did not intend that statewide voter lists be public, but rather to disclose the process by which they maintain their voter lists.
On July 17, a federal judge in Connecticut became the 16th judge to rule against the DOJ’s nationwide campaign to obtain sensitive voter registration data.
REDISTRICTING
Guest Column
New Law Gives New York State Legislature the Ability to Write Ballot Language for Referenda on Constitutional Amendments
By Joseph T. Burns and Sophia Moses
On June 5, 2026, New York Governor Kathy Hochul signed bill A11557/S10639 into law. This measure vests the state legislature with the authority to determine the final form in which proposed constitutional amendments are presented to voters on the ballot.
Previously, this responsibility was delegated to the bipartisan New York State Board of Elections. Under this longstanding practice, constitutional amendments to be voted on in a referendum were sent to the state attorney general, who would make language recommendations to the State Board of Elections. A mandated public comment period followed, after which the bipartisan NYSBOE commissioners would review and consider all recommendations before making a final determination on the ballot measure’s form and language.
This structure was designed to ensure that ballot descriptions provided a neutral and accurate assessment of the constitutional amendment voters were asked to ratify. However, this new measure reallocates this responsibility to the legislature, allowing it to both adopt the amendment and choose how it is explained to voters.
In a July 6, 2026, letter to Governor Hochul’s office, the two Republican commissioners of the State Board of Elections criticized this change by saying it “allows the state legislature to undermine the bipartisan nature of election administration” in New York. The commissioners emphasized that allowing the partisan body that proposed the constitutional amendment to determine how it is presented to voters creates a clear conflict of interest. They predicted that this change would “lead to slanted language attempting to push New Yorkers into voting a certain way rather than allowing voters to make an informed choice based on balanced information.”
In their letter, the commissioners indicated that this effect was, in fact, the intended outcome. Referring to a statement given to Politico on June 2, they highlighted that the bill’s Senate sponsor, Deputy Majority Leader Michael Gianaris, said:
“The voters of this state have elected Democrats to overwhelming majorities in both houses. Why should the Republican party have 50 percent of the say in what legislative proposals look like on the ballot?”
Under this change, the legislature is required to use “best efforts” to ensure that both the form of submission and the abstract of the proposed constitutional amendment conform to its plain language. Moreover, the legislature must use “best efforts” to ensure that each submission and abstract scores at or below an eighth grade reading level. After the legislature makes these determinations, the State Board of Elections must place the proposed constitutional amendment on the ballot without any alteration.
This direct handoff eliminates the usual public comment period. What is noteworthy about this change is that noteworthy constitutional amendments are expected to be presented to New York voters in the near future. For instance, in 2027, voters may be asked to approve a constitutional amendment that would remove the anti-partisan gerrymandering provisions of the state constitution.
The law making this change took effect immediately upon its signing on June 5. As a result, all future constitutional amendments sent to the voters for approval will be subject to this new provision.
Joseph T. Burns is a partner in Holtzman Vogel’s New York Office. https://www.holtzmanvogel.com/professionals/joseph-t-burns
Sophia Moses is a summer law clark at the firm.
CENSUS
Citizens Budget Commission Looks at New York’s Population
The Citizens Budget Commission has released a tool to help track and review population trends in New York.
From the report (published with permission), available at: https://cbcny.org/research/competitive-nys
“Competitive NYS: Value Proposition Tracker provides a comprehensive look at New York’s population, economy, public finances, and education. By comparing New York over time, across regions and counties, and against peer states and the nation, the dashboard highlights where the State is thriving, where it faces long-standing challenges, and where policy choices matter most.
It is intended to be a resource for the public, policymakers, advocates, and researchers—a statistical guide to better understand the issues facing New York, raise questions where deeper understanding is needed, and to inform policy that can help New Yorkers across the state thrive. By making objective data more easily accessible in one place, it can empower all New Yorkers to better understand the state’s competitive position and the opportunities and challenges that will shape its future.
New York remains one of the nation’s largest economic engines, with one of the country’s most productive and dynamic economies, a high-earning and highly educated population, accessible higher educational institutions that attract students from other states, and long life expectancies.
The data reveal much of this strength is driven by the State’s growth corridor—New York City and its surrounding communities, up the Hudson Valley to the Capital Region and out to Long Island. They also reveal strength in upstate urbanized employment centers, particularly surrounding Buffalo, Rochester, and Syracuse.
Outside that corridor and those cities, many communities continue to face longstanding challenges, some exacerbated by the pandemic—communities that are shrinking and getting older, with slower job growth and lower incomes.
International immigration has helped offset domestic outmigration in parts of the State, but demographic headwinds remain a challenge for much of New York, with many regions reporting fewer births than deaths. As federal immigration policy slows migration from abroad, reducing domestic outmigration takes on increased importance.
New York State and its localities also collect more from taxpayers than any other state and spend the third most per capita in the country. While this delivers the nation’s highest average per-student spending, it produces middling performance. The State’s broad and deep social safety net has been critical to supporting economic opportunity, but outcomes have not always kept pace with spending.
Competitive NYS highlights four themes critical to the State’s economic vibrancy and the value proposition it offers to residents, businesses, and visitors:
Growth has been strong downstate and near urbanized employment centers, but is increasingly concentrated. Population, jobs, and GDP are strongest in the growth corridor—New York City, its suburbs, and the Capital Region.
Large regions of the state continue to face longstanding challenges, population decline, and loss of jobs. This creates long-term fiscal and economic challenges.
New York makes unusually large public investments. Taxes, spending, healthcare coverage, and education funding all rank near the top nationally.
High spending does not always translate into leading outcomes. Despite spending growth that outpaces inflation, New York lags on outcomes such as reading and math performance and job growth.
Population and Migration
Population change demonstrates how well New York State is attracting and retaining residents. Migration patterns reveal residents’ location choices, indicating where they may see relatively higher value propositions. While the State’s population has grown overall, trajectories vary regionally and are reshaping where New Yorkers live and where future economic growth is likely to occur. While people continue to move to New York from abroad, federal policy is slowing international immigration. Retaining residents is paramount for the State’s long-term competitiveness.
New York’s population growth has been slower than the nation—the State remains about 200,000 (1 percent) residents below its 2019 peak, while the US is up 11.5 million (3.5 percent). Population loss in New York City drove the State’s significant pandemic-era population decline. Still, longer-term population gains are concentrated in New York City, its suburbs, and the Capital Region, while many northern and western regions continue to shrink.
AROUND THE NATION
From The Redistrict Network (@RedistrictNet)
NEW FEATURE! July 11: Daily District is a new project from Prof. Jonathan Cervas (CMU) and @Redistrictnet. Name all 435 U.S. House districts from their shape. Dropping imminently! — @RedistrictNet [from X]
June 29: The Colorado Supreme Court has blocked all attempts to redraw congressional district boundaries for the 2028 election from reaching the ballot, concluding that each of the proposed ballot measures violates the constitutional single-subject requirement. — @RedistrictNet [from X]
June 29: Wisconsin Supreme Court sets oral arguments for Sept. 16 in a pair of congressional redistricting lawsuits that seek to redraw the state’s boundaries.
Two separate three-judge panels dismissed the lawsuits. The appeals attempt to revive them for potential trials. — @RedistrictNet [from X]
June 1: The Problem Solvers Caucus has unveiled a bipartisan Gerrymandering Reform Framework to address congressional redistricting nationally. — @RedistrictNet [from X]
July 6: NJ Gov. Mikie Sherrill (@GovSherrillNJ) has signed the John R. Lewis Voter Empowerment Act of New Jersey. — @RedistrictNet [from X]
July 7: Senate President Bill Ferguson and House Speaker Joseline Peña-Melnyk today announced that the Maryland General Assembly will convene in a special session from August 3-5, 2026 to consider legislation proposing a constitutional amendment regarding congressional redistricting. — @RedistrictNet [from X]
July 8: The Eighth Circuit has vacated the district court’s ruling on North Dakota’s legislative map.
The case is remanded for further proceedings in light of Callais, which overhauled the Gingles framework used to assess Section 2 vote-dilution claims. — @RedistrictNet [from X]
July 9: The Utah Supreme Court will hear arguments in September 2026 over whether the Republican Legislature’s creation of a three-judge panel to hear the Utah congressional redistricting lawsuit is unconstitutional. — @RedistrictNet [from X]
July 14: Galveston County asks a federal judge to dismiss the Petteway redistricting case as moot after adopting a new commissioners court map. — @RedistrictNet [from X]
July 15: Protect AR Rights has submitted 108,837 signatures for a proposal to preserve and strengthen Arkansas’s ballot initiative and referendum process.
Arkansas officials are now reviewing those signatures to determine whether the measure will qualify for the November ballot. — @RedistrictNet [from X]
July 16: On Aug 4, Missouri voters will decide whether future citizen-led constitutional amendments must pass in all eight congressional districts, not just statewide.
Amendments referred by the legislature would still need only a simple majority. — @RedistrictNet [from X]
INSTITUTE RESOURCES
The New York Elections, Census and Redistricting Institute has archived many resources for the public to view on our Digital Commons Page.
Our Redistricting Resources page contains resources on the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Act. You can access the page here: https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/redistricting_resources/
Archived Updates can be accessed here: https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/redistricting_roundtable_updates/
Please share this weekly update with your colleagues. To be added to the mailing list, please contact [email protected]
The N.Y. Elections, Census & Redistricting Institute is supported by grants from the New York Community Trust, New York Census Equity Fund, the Mellon Foundation, and the New York City Council. This report was prepared by Jeff Wice, Esha Shah & Jason Fierman of @RedistrictNet.