Reforms and Restrictions: A Year of Contrasts in Election Law & Policy

by Voting Rights Lab

December 13, 2024

The past year is a story of both reforms and restrictions across the ever-evolving state election law and policy landscape. While some states expanded access to the ballot box and ensured more efficient election administration, others introduced legislation that could create new barriers for voters and election officials alike. 

In our final analysis of 2024, we’ve highlighted key trends in election law and policy shaping our elections now and in the future.


Restrictions to Voter Access and Election Administration

States continued to pursue new laws requiring documentary proof of citizenship for voters, despite robust checks and balances already in place to ensure only U.S. citizens can vote. 

  • New Hampshire enacted H.B. 1569, creating stricter documentation requirements for both voter registration and in-person voting. A lawsuit has been filed challenging the law for creating “unconstitutional roadblocks” to voting. 
  • Louisiana passed S.B. 436, which mandates that voters provide documentation proving U.S. citizenship as part of the voter registration process. 

Arizona – the only state with a documentary proof of citizenship law going into 2024 – has a split system, which requires documentary proof of citizenship to vote in state and local elections. Federal law already requires that voters attest, under penalty of perjury, that they are citizens and are eligible to vote. This bifurcated system has led to significant legal battles over the years — which are expected to continue. Other states, such as Ohio and Texas, have already prefiled similar bills for 2025, signaling a growing push for these types of burdensome documentation requirements. 

Several states also passed sweeping changes in an attempt to consolidate partisan control over election administration:

  • The North Carolina legislature overrode the governor’s veto to enact S.B. 382, which shifts authority to make appointments to the State Board of Elections from the governor to the state auditor. This comes after the state courts blocked 2023’s S.B. 749, a bill that would have shifted appointment power from the governor to the state legislature. 
  • Similarly, in Georgia, S.B. 189, stripped the secretary of state of his role as a nonvoting member of the State Election Board. While the Georgia Supreme Court blocked new election rules that would prohibit counties from certifying results and require unnecessary hand counts, these controversial changes may resurface in 2025. 

Improvements to Voter Access or Election Administration

Despite these setbacks, several states took important steps forward to improve voter access and the administration of elections. One notable trend is the movement to restore voting rights to individuals with past felony convictions in diverse states across the country:

  • Nebraska passed L.B. 20, eliminating the two-year waiting period for restoring voting rights after completing a felony sentence.
  • Colorado passed S.B.72, ensuring in-person early voting for eligible incarcerated voters in each county. 
  • Mississippi, Kentucky, and Virginia took steps to expand mail voting opportunities for eligible incarcerated individuals.

In other positive news, Minnesota enacted the Minnesota Voting Rights Act (H.B. 4772), a comprehensive law designed to enhance voter protections and increase oversight of election administration. A similar suite of bills, collectively referred to as the Michigan Voting Rights Act, are making their way through the Michigan legislature.

In the Courts

In 2024, multiple states saw legal challenges that could have far-reaching implications for mail voting and list maintenance:

  • Mississippi’s postmark rule, allowing ballots postmarked by Election Day to be received up to five days after the election, was struck down by the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals. 
  • By contrast, the 7th Circuit upheld Illinois’ postmark law, and the Nevada Supreme Court ruled in favor of allowing ballots to be counted post-Election Day. 
  • In Pennsylvania, litigation around the treatment of mail ballots received in envelopes containing errors continued throughout the year, and remains unresolved for future elections. 
  • In Virginia, the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to allow a controversial voter purge to proceed raised alarm bells. The Department of Justice issued a memo in response, emphasizing the importance of maintaining accurate voter rolls without disenfranchising eligible voters.

As we head into 2025, we remain committed to providing unique, state-focused insights from a national perspective. Explore our State Voting Rights Tracker for real-time updates and analysis and learn more about our work to ensure free and fair elections.