Our Work

This explainer aims to shed light on existing state laws criminalizing election-related misconduct and their potential application to curb improper actions by federal government officials. This explainer focuses on those provisions of state election codes that criminalize behavior that experts anticipate the federal government may engage in during the November elections in 2026. Part I describes the role of the federal government in elections, including the federal laws that prohibit certain behaviors by federal officials. Part II then explores the parallel provisions in state law, specifically noting the different types of state laws that may apply to anticipated federal activities. Part III then considers what states can do to educate officials about these laws and deter potential interference by federal actors. Finally, Part IV addresses enforcement-related issues and likely legal responses from the federal government.

This essay is part of a 50-state series about the nation’s constitutions. We’ve asked an expert from each state to dive into their constitution, narrate its history, identify its quirks, and summarize its most essential components for our readers. In 1848, voters in the Wisconsin Territory ratified the Wisconsin Constitution that is still in use today. This founding document, amended more than 150 times, reflects the work of generations of legislators, advocates, and voters on topics from democracy to finance to individual rights.

"With federal redistricting lawsuits increasingly difficult, state laws offer gerrymandering opponents another path. Thirty states have some form of a constitutional requirement for free elections, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. And at least 10 state supreme courts have found that state courts can decide cases involving allegations of partisan gerrymandering, according to a 2024 review by the State Democracy Research Initiative at the University of Wisconsin Law School."

"Diversity, equity and inclusion, or DEI, is on the November ballot in Wisconsin. That’s because the state Legislature passed a GOP proposal to ban governmental entities from discriminating against or granting preferential treatment based on race, sex color, ethnicity, or national origin. Now the issue goes to voters in a referendum that could amend the state constitution to include that ban. . . . "This is a process that doesn’t require the governor’s approval," says Lau."

More than a month after the November 2024 election, the result of the North Carolina Supreme Court race is still uncertain. There have been two recounts—one machine and one partial hand recount—neither of which changed the initial result: Democrat and incumbent North Carolina Supreme Court Justice Allison Riggs still leads over Republican North Carolina Court of Appeals Judge Jefferson Griffin by just under 750 votes. The North Carolina State Board of Elections (NCSBE) also rejected an election protest brought by Judge Griffin, challenging the eligibility of over 60,000 voters who cast a ballot in the last election. Judge Griffin, however, disputes that ruling, and litigation is now underway.

"As the incoming Trump administration seeks to get its appointees confirmed, a new session in the Wisconsin Legislature offers Gov. Tony Evers a fresh chance to get more of his appointees approved. Of Evers’ 17 Cabinet-level appointees who oversee state government agencies, six have been confirmed by legislators."

“'What I hope that people take away is that constitutional amendments and the potential constitutional convention isn't something that we need to be afraid of,' she said. 'It's something that we can embrace as part of the democratic process. But also that it's really important that as involved citizens and voters that we pay attention to these issues.'”

Every campaign season brings renewed attention to the amount of money influencing American politics, and who is spending it, and for what purposes. In particular, people are concerned about what is called “dark money.” The term sounds scary and raises the specter of shadowy people manipulating the nation’s politics. This piece unpacks what dark money is, what concerns it raises and what might be done to address it.

"Wisconsin election officials welcomed a clarification from the state attorney general this week on the scope of a constitutional amendment limiting who can conduct elections. But some local clerks and legal experts aren’t convinced that it’s enough to curb confusion over the measure or the risk of disruptive lawsuits."

"Wisconsinites will vote Tuesday on two proposed amendments to the state constitution that could reshape how elections are run in the state — but voters, and many election officials, don’t know exactly how the broadly written proposals would be interpreted by state election officials and the courts. Election officials said the second proposal could have especially unpredictable consequences. That one seeks to ban anybody besides election officials from performing 'any task in the conduct of any primary, election, or referendum.'"