This week- Court of Appeals to Hear Newburgh VRA Challenge; Mt. Pleasant Opposes State Legislators Filing Amicus Brief in Mt. Pleasant VRA case. Were N.Y.C. Mail-In Ballots Misprinted?; November 14 Statewide census Organizing Conference; VRA Preclearance; A Review of State VRA Preclearance at One Year; Around the Nation: Louisiana Before SCOTUS Tomorroe, Section 2 VRA Case & Private Rights of Action; Census Lawsuit Could Upend 2020 Census Apportionment & Redistricting; New Data Shows Tax Flight Is a Myth
LITIGATION
Orange County: Clarke et. al v. Town of Newburgh
On October 14, the New York Court of Appeals will hear the case of Clarke et. al v. Town of Newburgh. In 2022, New York enacted the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Act (NYVRA) to protect voting rights and ensure equal political participation for racial, ethnic, and language-minority groups.
Six voters in the Town of Newburgh allege that the Town’s at large method of election for Town Board members dilutes the voting power of Black and Hispanic voters in violation of the NYVRA. Black and Hispanic communities, which make up 25% and 15% of the population, respectively, yet have never elected a non-white Town Board member.
The Town of Newburgh appealed the issue of the NYVRA’s constitutionality to the New York Court of Appeals, claiming that the NYVRA is unconstitutional and violates the equal protection guarantees of the U.S. and New York Constitutions.
The trial court sided with the Town, striking down the NYVRA entirely. However, on appeal, the Appellate Division reversed, ruling that the Town lacked standing to challenge the law since it had not proven that compliance would force a constitutional violation.
Westchester County: Serratto et. al v. Town of Mt. Pleasant
Following opposition by the Town of Mount Pleasant to permit State Senator Zelnor Myrie and Assembly Member Latrice Walker to file an amicus brief supporting the plaintiffs challenging the town’s at-large board, attorneys for the two legislators provided the court with additional reasons to permit them to submit a brief. They argue that courts regularly permit legislators to appear as amici in situations of statutory interpretation and where issues impact their constituents. Here, the two legislators want to offer their insights into the legislative history of the state voting rights act. Myrie and Walker chaired the legislature’s Election Law Committees at the time of the state voting rights law’s enactment.
ELECTIONS
New York City: Were Mail-In Ballots Misprinted?
The October 12th New York Daily News editorial page highlighted unhappiness with how the New York City Board of Elections printed mail-in ballots. In the paper’s view, early mail-in ballots being sent to New York City voters for Andrew Cuomo and Zohran Mamdani are in error.
The editorial points out that Mamdani is listed on row A as a Democrat and on row D for the Working Families Party (WFP). The paper points out that the candidate nominated by the WFP before the primary listed a different candidate as a placeholder. The placeholder, Fordham Law Professor Gowri Krishna was later nominated for a judgeship, opening the door for Mamdani to become the WFP candidate. However, the WFP did not meet legal requirements to replace Krishna because the party did not meet the requirement to have three of five WFP county party leaders to permit Mamdani, a Democrat, to get the WFP line (this is known as the Wilson-Pakula rule).
The editorial said that there were no challenges to the Mamdani replacement and let him take the mayoral slot.
An addition issue pointed out by the editorial is that Andrew Cuomo appears on row I in the Bronx, Staten Island and Manhattan and on row J in Brooklyn and Queens. While “Cuomo’s name is at the same geometric position on all ballots,” the labeling could be misleading.
Former mayoral candidate Jim Walden appears on row J in the Bronx, Staten Island and Manhattan while he is on row K in Brooklyn and Queens. independent candidate Joseph Hernandez appears on row H in the Bronx and Staten Island, row G in Manhattan and row I in Brooklyn and Queens.
According to the Daily News, “the multiple rows for Cuomo and the others the Board claims is not an error” but is caused by the way independent candidates are assigned to the ballot based on a first-come/first-served basis. The paper suggests that candidates be assigned ballot placement by random drawing instead.
NOVEMBER 14TH NYCENSUS CONFERENCE
Friday, November 14, 2025 | 12 – 2 PM | Virtual Event
New York State Census Partnership
The road to Census 2030 starts now. Join a virtual convening that brings together experts, advocates, and partners from across New York to kick off the conversation, share key updates, and begin building the infrastructure absolutely critical for a complete and equitable count.
Register Here Today: https://nyls.wufoo.com/forms/nys-census-2030-launch/
Moderated by Sol Marie Alfonso-Jones, Sr. Program Director, The New York Community Trust, this session will include:
· An overview of what the census is, and why it matters to all New Yorkers.
· An overview of the New York State Census Partnership (NYSCP) —what we learned from 2020, how we are structuring the work now, our current priorities, what has been achieved to date, and how stakeholders can get involved.
· Why community involvement in the Census matters with Lurie Daniel Favors, Executive Director, Center for Law and Social Justice at Medgar Evers College
· A look at New York’s shifting demographics and what they tell us about who and where we need to reach, with Jan Vink, Cornell University Program on Applied Demographics
· A deep dive into the Local Update of Census Addresses (LUCA) process—what it is, why it matters, and how to prepare now, with Joe Salvo, Consultant, and Former Chief Demographer for New York City
· Key updates from the U.S. Census Bureau, presented by Meeta Anand, Leadership Conference
· A state-level perspective on what’s happening in New York from Jeff Wice, Distinguished Adjunct Professor & Senior Fellow, Elections, Census and Redistricting Institute, New York Law School, with special guests Senator Jeremy Cooney, and Assembly Members Michaelle Solages and Landon Dais.
Whether you’re a veteran of census work or just getting started, this session will equip you with critical information, past efforts, where things stand, and how to get involved as we look toward 2030. It’s not too early—now is the time to begin laying the groundwork for a fair and accurate count. It’s going to take all of us, working together, to ensure every New Yorker is seen, counted, and represented.
VOTING RIGHTS ACT
N.Y. Attorney General’s Office Preclearance
802 Erie County BOE- poll site locations- granted
The changes requested are to change the location of three of Erie County’s primary and general election poll sites. Two of the poll site changes have come about because of closures of the worship sites due to financial reasons. Because of the closures, the sites can no longer be used as polling locations. One of the poll site changes is because the poll site no longer wants to be used.
861 Erie County BOE- poll site location- granted
The change requested is to move the St. Stanislaus Polish Saturday School early voting location, located at 128 Wilson St., Buffalo, NY 14212 to the Broadway Market, located at 999 Broadway St., Buffalo, NY 14212.61 Erie County BOE- poll site location- granted
All submissions can be viewed at: https://nyvra-portal.ag.ny.gov/
A Review: The N.Y. S. Preclearance Process After One Year
The John R. Lewis Voting Rights Act of New York (NYVRA), enacted in June 2022, created a strong state-level voting rights protection. A central feature is its preclearance requirement, which obligates certain local jurisdictions to seek approval before making election-related changes. The provision took effect on September 22, 2024, as the NYVRA Handbook notes: “A change to a covered policy made by a covered entity on or after September 22, 2024, must therefore be submitted . . . for review before that change can be made.” To carry this out, the Attorney General’s Office launched the NYVRA Preclearance Portal, where jurisdictions upload submissions such as poll site relocations, district assignments, early voting hours, and election calendar adjustments and these filings are reviewed to protect voter access. Between September 2024 and October 2025 (as of 10/12/2025), the portal recorded 63 submissions, reflecting both routine administrative updates and substantive modifications affecting voter access.
The jurisdictional spread illustrates how both large and small entities participated. The New York City Board of Elections (NYCBOE) led the way with 17 submissions, ranging from early voting relocations in Brooklyn and Queens to poll site reassignments in Manhattan and the Bronx. Erie County (8), Onondaga County (7), Nassau County (6), Albany County (6), Monroe County (5), Suffolk County (5), and Westchester County (4) followed with steady activity, while Rockland County (2), Orange County (1), Albany City School District (1), and NYC’s citywide election calendar filing (1) rounded out the total.
The substantive focus of the requests overwhelmingly involved polling places. Out of the 63 submissions, 39 dealt with the number or location of polling sites. These included relocations of long-standing voting sites such as schools, churches, and community centers due to construction, accessibility limitations, or availability conflicts. For example, Pompey and Manlius in Onondaga County reassigned several election districts to new schools or community facilities; Rockland County relocated sites from Park Evangelica and William P. Faist centers; and New York City moved or consolidated multiple early voting locations in Brooklyn, Queens, and Staten Island. Another 4 dealt with poll site hours, primarily to accommodate special elections. 18 submissions focused on the assignment of election districts to poll sites, often tied to redistricting or resource adjustments. 1 submission addressed the election calendar, filed by NYC, while a single “Other” filing, a Suffolk County charter amendment extending legislative terms, was categorized as a judicial submission rather than an administrative one. In total, 62 submissions were administrative and 1 judicial, the latter marking the first court-reviewed preclearance under the NYVRA.
Temporal trends closely tracked the state’s election calendar. Activity surged in March (15) and May (16) as jurisdictions prepared for the June primaries, with additional peaks in April (9), August (6), and September (6). Submissions in July (2) and October (1) reflected late adjustments and follow-up filings for upcoming general elections.
As of October 2025, the Attorney General’s Office has granted 56 submissions, preliminarily granted 1, and 6 remain under review. The overall process has proven efficient, collaborative, and transparent, offering both guidance and accountability to local boards.
Altogether, the 2024-2025 preclearance process reveals a system engaged in ensuring election fairness. While most submissions reflected practical adjustments to poll sites and district assignments, the very act of state review under the NYVRA affirms that no change, whether a church relocation, school reassignment, or early voting consolidation, is too small to escape oversight when it touches on voter access.
AROUND THE NATION
SCOTUS: Louisiana v. Callais
On October 15, the United States Supreme Court will hear arguments in the case of Louisiana v. Callais. The case is about whether Louisiana’s 2024 congressional map – which includes a second majority-Black district – violates the Constitution by using race in redistricting. In 2022, Louisiana approved a congressional map with only one majority-Black district, despite Black residents making up about a third of the state’s population. Black voters sued under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act (VRA), claiming the map diluted their voting power. The decision resulted in a new map with two majority-Black districts.
However, the map is now being challenged by a different group of voters who argue the new map is an unconstitutional racial gerrymander. These voters maintain that the VRA’s race-based requirements are inconsistent with a “color-blind” Constitution. Louisiana has changed its stance now, claiming that even race-conscious redistricting to comply with the VRA is unconstitutional. Further, the U.S. Solicitor General, on behalf of the Trump administration, filed a brief arguing that Section 2 was meant to target intentional discrimination and should not be interpreted to compel racial gerrymanders.
Black voters and civil rights groups defend the map, arguing that Section 2 of the VRA allows limited use of race when necessary to remedy a history of discrimination and to ensure fair representation for minority voters.
Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians v. Howe: The Debate Over the Private Right of Action in the Voting Rights Act
The U.S. Supreme Court’s upcoming review in Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians v. Howe may determine whether private citizens may continue to bring lawsuits under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. The case arises from the Eighth Circuit’s decision that the statute does not provide a private right of action, a ruling that diverges from more than five decades of prior judicial practice. The outcome could reshape how voting rights are enforced across the country. More on this case next week.
CENSUS
New Census Lawsuit Could Upend 2020 Census Results
A new lawsuit challenging the results of the 2020 Census has been filed by America First Legal in a Florida federal court alleging that the 2020 Census was “was unconstitutional and violated federal law” because the Census Bureau relied on “unlawful statistical methods” which “distorted” congressional representation.
AFL is asking for the court to declare the 2020 Census “unlawful” and produce a new Census report with new data, and without the use of two processes that the Census Bureau uses to ensure quality and protected data. Following the lines of Indiana Sen. Jim Banks’ (R) letter to the Commerce Secretary, blamed the use of statistical methods for inaccurate totals and requested the release of original, unaltered census. The complaint, on behalf of several Florida college students, argues that (1) the use of differential privacy and (2) the use of group quarters imputation are both prohibited statistical methods that the Census Bureau used in 2020. The plaintiffs request the Bureau create a brand new 2020 Census report without differential privacy and without group quarters imputation.
The case has been assigned to Judge William F. Jung, a first-term Trump appointee who had been previously nominated by Presidents W. Bush and Obama, who is also a former Rehnquist clerk. Judge Jung yesterday requested a three judge panel be convened under 22 USC § 2284, so two additional judges will also be assigned to the case.
The complaint argues that congressional reapportionment was impacted by the use of differential privacy. The plaintiffs attorneys failed to recognize that the use of differential privacy did not impact congressional reapportionment because the state population numbers were not subjected to the statistical noise added to the census for privacy protection. Instead, the total whole number of persons counted in each state were used for reapportionment.
It will be interesting to learn how the Trump Administration responds to the complaint. They can oppose the motion, raising the possibility of a quick decision or they can agree with the plaintiffs and seek a settlement where the possibility of providing states with new unadjusted redistricting data could be provided to states for further mid-decade redistricting. (with thanks to Jacob Carrel of the National Redistricting Foundation for this information).
New Data Confirm Tax Flight Is A Myth
From the Fiscal Policy Institute where Chief Economist Emily Eisner analyzes new data from the NYS Department of Taxation and Finance.
“The 2025 New York mayoral race has reignited debates over whether increasing taxes on high earners will cause them to move away in search of lower taxes. But new tax data confirm FPI’s prior findings that tax flight among top earners is largely a myth.
Highlights
- New 2023 tax data from the NYS Department of Tax and Finance confirm FPI’s prior findings that New York’s top 1 percent of earners move out of state less frequently than all other income groups.
- Migration data show that there was no notable increase in out-migration among high earners following the State’s 2021 increases to the top Personal Income Tax (PIT) rates. These higher tax rates raise approximately $3.6 billion annually.
- FPI analysis of part-year resident filing rates, which reflect migration patterns, shows that the trends among high earners in 2023 align closely with pre-pandemic patterns (2015–2019), indicating that the 2021 tax increases did not change high earner migration behavior.
- Following the 2021 PIT rate increases, high earners’ share of total state income showed no significant changes—indicating that the rate increases did not have adverse effects on high earners’ incomes.
- Because fears of tax flight are unfounded, policymakers should support raising tax rates to fund essential programs such as universal childcare, affordable housing, Medicaid, and public transit.
Read the full report here: https://fiscalpolicy.org/new-tax-data-confirm-that-tax-flight-is-a-myth
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, Esha Shah, and Daniel Bonaventura.