This week- Can New York Redraw Its Congressional Map?, U.S. DOJ Sends Questions to State Board of Elections, N.Y.C. To Keep Closed Primaries, N.Y. Not Likely to See Musk’s Third Party on Ballot Anytime Soon, Voting Rights Act Preclearance, Census Preclearance, Around the Nation, Upcoming Events
REDISTRICTING
Can New York Redraw Its Congressional Districts?
As the Texas Legislature begins to meet this week to take up a partisan effort to redraw the state’s congressional map, California Governor Gavin Newsom is exploring how his state could redraw its map to counter the power play in the Lone Star State. Governor Newsom believes that one must play hardball when confronted by the type of demands requested by the White House.
The Texas Legislature has few restrictions on that it can do when redistricting. the state redrew its congressional map in 2003 for no other reason than to pick up more districts for the state GOP’s recently takeover of the legislature.
In California, Governor Newsom would either have to amend the state constitution to permit mid-decade redistricting (that would involve a 2/3 majority vote in each chamber of the California Legislature followed by a vote of the electorate. Alternatively (and less likely) the Governor can ask the legislature to redraw the map even though the state constitution is silent on the power to re-redistrict; it does however limit redistricting to once-a-decade).
New York has different rules. First, the state constitution prohibits a mid-decade redistricting. In Article III of the state constitution, Article III, Section 4 says that “a reapportionment plan and the districts contained in such plan shall be in force until the effective date of a plan based upon the subsequent federal decennial census taken in a year ending in zero unless modified pursuant to court order.” Further, the state Court of Appeals invalidated the 2022 remapping of the state’s congressional districts by the legislature because the map was determined to be a partisan gerrymander, in violation of other state constitutional requirements.
Technically, only the state senate map can be redrawn before 2030 if a court (in a new lawsuit) directs the state Independent Redistricting Commission goes back to work to finish the mapping it didn’t complete in 2022 and that map is approved by the state legislature and governor.
Unlike in Texas, where the state legislature can redraw a map without constraints or in California, where the state constitutional amendment process involves approval by the legislature followed by approval by the voters, the New York process can take over a year or more. New York’s constitution requires that any amendments be approved by two consecutively elected legislatures followed by a vote of the electorate. For example, an amendment passed by the Senate and Assembly in 2025 would have to pass in the same exact form by the new legislature elected in 2027 and then go to the voters for approval. An amendment introduced this year to change the redistricting process could not go into effect until late 2017, one year past the 2026 elections.
ELECTIONS
U.S. Justice Department Sends Questions to New York Elections Board
The U.S. Justice Department has contacted at least a dozen states requesting voter rolls, 2024 election records, and information‐sharing agreements. New York’s State Board of Elections received one of these letters on June 30th where DOJ asked for access to the state’s voter registration rolls, and included 14 other questions inquiring about the state’s compliance with HAVA laws. The state board has not yet responded to the questions which included inquires about how identifiers are assigned to voters, how the state voter roles anre coordinated with other state agencies, how duplicate registrations are removed, and about how people with felony records are handled. The DOJ letter can be accessed here: https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/State-of-New-York-1.pdf
N.Y.C. Will Retain Closed Primaries (For Now) Panel Withdraws Proposal to Switch to Open Primaries
A proposal under consideration by the City Charter Revision Commission to enact an open primary for city elections has been tabled. Under a draft proposal, all registered voters, regardless of their party registration, would be able to participate in primary elections. Instead, the charter commission has decided not to move forward with this proposal because of lack of agreement on how to develop an open primary. In a statement, Commission Chair Richard R. Buery, Jr. said:
“On Monday, the Charter Revision Commission will consider advancing a set of transformative proposals related to land use reform and affordable housing, as well as a proposal to increase voter participation in local elections by moving municipal elections to even years. However, after careful consideration and extensive input from stakeholders from across the city, we will not consider the question of open primaries with top two. While I am personally disappointed to not be advancing this question, there was no clear consensus among Commissioners, experts, and city leaders as to the appropriate model of reform to advance. I hope civic leaders will build on the progress that we have made this year, develop greater consensus, and advance a proposal to voters prior to the next citywide election. And I am excited to vote on critical proposals that have significant potential to increase voter turnout and make our city for more affordable for all New Yorkers.”
Guest Column: New Yorkers Not Likely to See Musk’s America Party on a Ballot Anytime Soon
by: Joseph T. Burns of Holtzman Vogel Baran Torchinsky & Josefiak PLLC
This column first appeared in the National Law Review and is republished with the author’s permission.
Elon Musk, the world’s richest man, recently announced via X, the social media platform he owns, that he was forming a new political party: the America Party. Musk’s announcement made headlines and captured the attention of political junkies across the country. But for all the attention Musk’s message drew, founding a new political party in the United States takes much more than a single social media post. A vast web of state and federal laws stands in the way. In one state in particular—New York—Musk and the America Party are likely to face their toughest set of legal and political difficulties.
First, New York law prohibits the use of the word “America” in the name of any political party. Under New York’s Election Law, no party may include the words “America,” “American,” or any abbreviation or plural thereof, in its name. The prohibition is designed to ensure that parties are not implying any sort of governmental authority or endorsement. As a result, even if Musk successfully builds public support for his party in the Empire State, neither the party nor its candidates would be allowed to appear on the ballot under the banner of the “America Party.”
The name, however, is just the beginning of the America Party’s legal challenges in New York State. Achieving official party recognition in New York requires overcoming steep electoral hurdles. Under current law, a political party only gains formal recognition if its candidate for governor or president receives at least 130,000 votes or 2% of the total vote for that office, whichever is greater. That’s a far cry from the old party qualification threshold. Until the Election Law was amended in 2020, a party gained official status when its candidate for governor received a mere 50,000 votes. This lower threshold allowed a wide variety of minor political parties to achieve party status. After the 2018 election and until 2020, eight political parties enjoyed official recognition in the state.
But in 2020 then-Governor Andrew Cuomo and the state legislature raised the bar. The new law more than doubled the vote requirement and added the presidency to the qualifying offices. The result was immediate and had a major impact on how the political game is played in New York State: four of the eight parties lost official status after the 2020 election.
Musk’s stated plans make it even less likely that his party will meet this high threshold. He has announced that his party will focus solely on fielding candidates in races for the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives. That approach may serve his national political ambitions, but it bypasses the very races (governor and president) that New York uses to determine party status. As long as the America Party passes on those contests, it will remain, under New York law, an independent body and not receive the benefits, including an automatic spot on the ballot, given to recognized political parties.
Musk, of course, could change his mind on running candidates for president and governor, but qualifying those candidates for the ballot in New York is no easy task. Without recognized party status, any America Party candidate for president or governor would need to petition their way onto the ballot through an independent nominating petition. These petitions require at least 45,000 valid signatures, including a minimum of 500 signatures from voters in each of one-half of New York’s congressional districts.
Meeting those minimum requirements has proven to be difficult, some might even argue it’s impossible. Since the new petition requirements took effect, no independent candidate for governor or president has successfully met them. In both the 2022 gubernatorial race and the 2024 presidential contest, the only candidates who appeared on the New York ballot were the nominees of the four recognized parties: Democratic, Republican, Conservative, and Working Families.
Musk’s challenges don’t stop at statewide races. Down-ballot candidates affiliated with Musk’s party will also face steep requirements to just obtain a place on the ballot. For instance, a congressional candidate running under the America Party banner will need to gather more than twice the number of valid petition signatures required of a Democrat or Republican candidate seeking the same office. For candidates seeking seats in the state legislature, independent nominating petitions require three times the number of signatures required of Democratic and Republican candidates.
If Musk is serious about the America Party playing a long-term role in American politics, he will need more than an online following. Building a political party and wielding influence in the halls of power takes legal know-how and political savvy.
In New York, Musk will soon find that the New York State Election Law is filled with minefields and pitfalls. He and his new political party have their work cut out for them in the Empire State.
VOTING RIGHTS ACT
N.Y. Attorney General’s Office Preclearance
Suffolk County received approval from the Westchester County Supreme Court following the county’s submission for a judicial preclearance request to Supreme Court, Westchester County on July 11, 2025. The request related to a change in the term of office for county legislators. The Court granted preclearance on July 18, 2025.
All submissions can be viewed at: https://nyvra-portal.ag.ny.gov/
CENSUS
Senate Appropriators Advance Census Funding Bill for FY 2026
From the Census Project:
The Senate Appropriations Committee passed their version of the Commerce Justice Science (CJS) Appropriations legislation for Fiscal Year 2026 (FY 2026) by a 19-10 vote on July 17, 2025, having resolved the dispute that interrupted the last attempted markup on July 10.
The Senate FY 2026 CJS bill offers less funding than both President Trump and the House Appropriations Committee, but includes important data quality-focused report language supported by The Census Project on the American Community Survey and the 2026 Census Test.
The Senate bill would provide $1.52 billion for the Census Bureau, nearly $138 million more than the level enacted in FY 2025, but about $155 million short of President Trump’s budget request, $157 million less than the House CJS Appropriations Subcommittee-passed bill, unfortunately far shy of the $2 billion recommended by the Census Project to make needed investments long neglected.
The Senate bill proposes $328.5 for the Current Surveys and Programs account (on par with the FY 2025 enacted level) and $1.054 billion for the Periodic Censuses and Programs account (nearly $138 million more than the FY 2025 enacted level).
It is unlikely that the Senate CJS bill will make it to the Senate floor before the current fiscal year ends on September 30.
The full House Appropriations Committee is scheduled to meet on their version of the FY 2026 bill on July 24.
The accompanying Senate committee report language supported by The Census Project includes:
- “American Community Survey [ACS].—The census stakeholder and data user communities are interested in ensuring the integrity, utility, and reliability of data from the ACS. Given that the Census Bureau did not fully release 1 year ACS estimates in 2021, the Committee requests an update on steps the Census Bureau has taken and intends to take to modernize the ACS, especially increasing the survey’s sample size, expanding nonresponse follow up operations, and reducing respondent burden. The Committee seeks specific feedback estimating the cost of these and any other ACS enhancements that the Census Bureau is considering. The Committee also directs the Census Bureau to report on how improvements to the ACS relate to the Bureau’s broader operational trans formation efforts. The Committee directs the Bureau to provide a report addressing these matters within 180 days of enactment of this act.”
- “Census Test.—Fiscal year 2026 is a crucial year in the ramp up to the 2030 Census, as the Census Bureau is scheduled to conduct the 2026 Census Test in six geographically and demographically diverse field sites nationwide and with a nationally representative sample of households. The Committee urges the Census Bureau to prioritize and protect funding and contracts necessary to ensure the objectives of the 2026 Census Test are fully realized.”
The Senate report includes other language that may be of interest to stakeholders, including:
- “Data Sets.—The Committee notes the recent removal or modification of various Census and the Bureau of Economic Analysis [BEA] data sets that were previously publicly available. The Committee’s questions about these changes remain unanswered. The Committee directs the Census Bureau and BEA, within 30 days of enactment of this act, to provide a briefing on the scope of the removal and modifications to the data sets. The Committee also directs the Census Bureau and BEA to provide the Committee with a report, within 180 days of enactment of this act, containing a list of all data sets that were removed or modified as a result of recent executive orders or other directives. The report shall also assess why the data sets were removed or modified and how users of these data products can access them in their original, unaltered forms.”
- “Termination of Advisory Committees.—The Committee directs the Census Bureau, in consultation with BEA and within 30 days of the enactment of this act, to provide a report on the advisory committee terminations, which occurred in February 2025. The report should include a complete explanation of why these committees were terminated and a plan detailing how the Department will receive input from external stakeholders in the absence of these advisory committees.”
- “Research and Evaluation Reports.—The Committee notes that, earlier this year, the Census Bureau delayed key reports that help prepare for the 2030 Census and ongoing surveys. The Committee shares the interest of the census stakeholder and data user community in ensuring the integrity, utility, and reliability of data from ongoing surveys and the decennial census. The Committee requests a comprehensive report, within 180 days of enactment of this act, on how the Census Bureau plans to field the 2030 Census and other surveys. The report shall include estimated budgetary needs to prepare for and execute the decennial census.”
- “Effects of Field Office Closures.—The Committee notes that field office presence is integral to the successful execution of the decennial census and other census products. The Committee directs the Census Bureau to submit, no later than 180 days after enactment of this act, a report detailing: (1) the number and location of facilities, by quarter, with operations to carry out statutorily required functions of the Census Bureau; (2) a detailed description of the criteria the Census Bureau reviewed prior to any field office closure; (3) a detailed summary for transitioning the statutorily required functions of a facility that is no longer in service as of the date of enact of this act; (4) metrics for measuring performance of statutorily required functions at a program, project, or activity level disaggregated by region; (5) the number of full time equivalents, by quarter, hired to perform statutorily required functions hired under Schedule C or the Schedule Policy/Career; and (6) a detailed description of what actions or procedures the Census Bureau has implemented to monitor any impact to service delivery or to address service concerns from Federal clients in areas or regions where the Census Bureau has closed a facility.”
- “Utilizing Libraries and Community Partners for Census Surveys.—The Committee directs the Census Bureau to continue to conduct outreach to public libraries and other community technology centers to ensure that they are fully informed about and equipped to support residents’ participation in Census Bureau surveys. The Bureau should work with libraries, in coordination with the Institute of Museum and Library Services, as part of the overall strategy to maximize response to the ACS, other surveys, and the decennial Census. Such outreach should include coordinating with library organizations, providing libraries with informational materials, and offering webinars or conference presentations to library audiences, as appropriate for Census surveys and tests.”
LITIGATION
Supreme Court Justice Pauses Ruling that Could Weaken Voting Rights Act
Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh has paused a ruling from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit that bars individuals from filing discrimination lawsuits based on the Voting Rights Act. This decision comes out of a 2022 North Dakota redistricting lawsuit—initiated by the Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians and the Spirit Lake Tribe—which claimed the new North Dakota map diluted the voting power of Native Americans.
The lawsuit was filed under Section 2 of the VRA, which bars racially discriminatory voting laws and practices. A federal judge ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, but the divided 8th Circuit overturned the prior decision. The 8th Circuit—which encompasses Arkansas, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota—did not rule on the substance of the tribes’ arguments, but ruled that individuals did not have the right to bring challenges under Section 2. Instead, only the U.S. Justice Department can do so. More than 400 challenges have been brought by individuals under Section 2 since 1982. Furthermore, the 8th Circuit is now the only circuit in the country that has ever found that individuals cannot sue under Section 2.
This administrative stay will give the U.S. Supreme Court more time to consider whether to hear an appeal by the North Dakota tribes. It is unclear when the Court may issue a decision on whether or not to hear this case.
OHIO: Although Ohio approved the current state congressional map in 2021, Ohio must now draw a new map for the next three election cycles. Since no Ohio Democrats voted for the current map, the map only lasts four years before state law requires a new one to be drawn. Ohio’s current congressional delegation includes five Democrats and ten Republicans.
The Ohio Legislature must pass a congressional map—with support from at least three-fifths of lawmakers in each chamber and half of the Democrats—by September 30th. Then, the Ohio Redistricting Commission—including five Republican lawmakers and statewide officials, as well as two Democratic lawmakers—must pass a map with bipartisan support by October 31st. The job would then return to the Legislature, which can approve a map with support from one-third of Democrats and three-fifths of lawmakers total.
Another option is for the Legislature to pass a map without Democratic support. However, if lawmakers choose this route, then Republican lawmakers cannot “unduly” favor a political party or incumbents or “unduly” split counties, municipalities, and townships.
Ultimately, Ohio must approve a new congressional map by November 30th to use in the 2026 elections. Any map approved by Ohio lawmakers will be sent to Governor DeWine for his approval.
UPCOMING EVENTS
NYC Charter Revision Commission
The New York City Charter Revision Commission will hold a public meeting on Monday, July 21, 2025, at 1 p.m. The meeting will be held at the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission Public Hearing Room, 253 Broadway, 2nd Floor, New York, NY 10007. Government-issued identification is required to enter the building.
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 Jeffrey.wice@nyls.edu
The N.Y. Elections, Census & Redistricting Institute is supported by grants from the New York Community Trust, New York Census Equity Fund and the New York City Council. This report was prepared by Jeff Wice and Alexis Marking.