Research

As part of President Trump’s efforts to expand federal control over the country’s historically state-run election infrastructure, the U.S. Department of Justice has demanded copies of states’ complete voter registration lists, including voters’ highly sensitive data like birthdates, partial Social Security numbers, and driver’s license numbers. The Justice Department has filed federal lawsuits against 24 states (so far) and Washington, D.C., seeking orders compelling these jurisdictions to turn over their data. This tracker monitors the Justice Department’s lawsuits.

The U.S. Justice Department has demanded states' complete, unredacted vote registration lists. States have mostly declined to provide their full, unredacted voter registration lists. This report examines the questions raised by the federal government's demands about the long-established authority of states to administer elections and the scope of the federal government’s role in the voter registration process.

Federal laws and institutions have long played a central role in addressing public corruption. This report considers the potential for states to play a more central role in addressing public corruption. To date, the vast majority of state public corruption prosecutions have involved misconduct by state or local officials. But beyond addressing public corruption at the state and local levels, state law also provides an underexplored pathway for deterring and punishing corrupt conduct at the federal level.

This Report describes the recently enacted mask ban in California and the proposed laws in other states. Under existing precedent, mask bans are neither clearly prohibited nor clearly permissible. This Report also provides an overview of other options states may have to address masking by federal law enforcement.

Victims of unconstitutional federal actions often have difficulty recovering money damages for their injuries. This Report discusses a potential remedial pathway that is beginning to garner interest among policymakers and litigants: state-created causes of action authorizing people to sue federal officials for damages.

This report explores when states can or cannot pursue prosecutions against federal officials and what that has looked like in practice. This practice stretches back to at least the early 1800s, but it comes with a mixed track record. This report explores when states can or cannot pursue prosecutions against federal officials and what that has looked like in practice.

The 2024–25 Wisconsin Supreme Court term wrapped up in June and July with a series of high-profile decisions, including on abortion, administrative rulemaking, and the governor’s partial veto power. This article summarizes some of the court’s most notable 2024–25 rulings, including several that implicate democracy and state constitutional law. It also previews what could be ahead in the court’s next term, which begins in September 2025.

In recent decades, the Wisconsin Legislature has increasingly empowered legislative committees, rather than its full membership, to wield control over state agencies and programs. This practice, which makes the state a national outlier, has drawn scrutiny recently from the Wisconsin Supreme Court. his Explainer examines the latest legal battle between Wisconsin’s legislative and executive branches, focusing on the legislature’s unusual approach to funding the childhood literacy program, the legal challenge it faces, and how it compares to other states—where legislative committees typically lack discretionary control over public funds. It also briefly discusses the legislature’s challenge to the governor’s veto power.

On April 1, 2025, Wisconsin voters will choose the newest justice on the Wisconsin Supreme Court. In doing so, they will determine whether the court retains its current 4-3 liberal lean or flips back to a conservative-leaning majority. Either way, the race could have major implications for high-profile issues likely to come before the court, including abortion, election law, and union rights. To provide context and background on the supreme court candidates, this explainer details the types of cases Crawford and Schimel have handled as circuit judges, looks at how their rulings have fared on appeal, analyzes key democracy-related decisions they have authored, and examines what they have said about major issues that may soon come before the court.

On Wisconsin’s April 1, 2025, spring election ballot, voters will see a proposed constitutional amendment asking whether to add a voter ID requirement to the state constitution. Wisconsin already has a state statute that requires voters to present an acceptable photo ID in order to vote. By constitutionalizing this requirement, the amendment would, if approved, make it more difficult for a future legislature or court to change course on voter ID. This explainer describes the proposed amendment, lays out the main arguments being made for and against the proposal, and provides national context on voter ID requirements.