National: How the Supreme Court could upend the midterm elections | Richard L. Hasen/MS Now

Pending before the Supreme Court are three disparate cases, each with the potential to remake rules on district boundaries, campaign finance and the eligibility of certain mail-in ballots. These rulings, issued in the middle of the election season, could potentially confound voters, scramble overworked and threatened election administrators, and alter campaign strategies in the middle of heated election contests. And depending on how the justices rule, these decisions may have cascading effects including new court challenges, legislative changes and even more uncertainty in the months before the midterms. The justices can avoid this confusion entirely. In June 1964 the court issued a landmark decision in Reynolds v. Sims that helped cement the principle of “one person, one vote.” Yet the ruling made clear that it need not be applied to that fall’s fast-approaching elections. Whatever this court ultimately decides on the merits in these cases, it should apply the same principle. Read Article

National: Supreme Court remade by Trump ushers in historic defeats for civil rights | Justin Jouvenal/The Washington Post

The sharply conservative Supreme Court that President Donald Trump’s three appointees remade is the first since at least the 1950s to reject civil rights claims in a majority of cases involving women and minorities, according to a detailed analysis conducted for The Washington Post. The shift brings to an end a streak of successive courts expanding such protections that began with the dawn of the civil rights era. But the historic nature of the current court is also evident in other key areas of the law over the five terms since the third of Trump’s appointees joined the bench. The analysis shows that in addition to civil rights, the court powered by Trump’s picks — Justices Neil M. Gorsuch, Brett M. Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett — has pushed to the right of any modern court on religious rights and voting issues. The court has also entered a new era of extreme partisanship. None over the past seven decades has been as starkly polarized. Read Article

National: ‘A logistical nightmare.’ Experts explain Trump’s mail-in ballot order | Josh Meyer/USA Today

“The EO is a logistical nightmare and clearly represents magical thinking – leaving aside constitutional issues,” said Charles Stewart III, the director of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Election Data and Science Lab. “What’s important to note is that the federal system doesn’t have reliable and unique information about people on voter rolls,” Stewart told USA TODAY. To create such a vetted list, he said, would require mashing together many existing federal government databases – including from the Social Security Administration and the notoriously inaccurate Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) – that already have established problems even before anyone tries to combine them. Such an undertaking could take years, Stewart said, and require at the very least establishing pilot programs, creating and “debugging” entire new databases, getting congressional and public input – and, importantly, obtaining and spending a lot of federal funding. “If one were genuinely serious about implementation,” he said, “one would need not just rules but project management, funding streams, intergovernmental agreements, vendor capacity, testing cycles and a hierarchy for resolving conflicts between federal data, state voter files, and local election deadlines.” Read Article

National: Democrats sue to block Trump’s ‘unconstitutional’ mail ballot order | Jonathan Shorman/News From The States

Democrats sued over President Donald Trump’s executive order clamping down on mail ballots on Wednesday, signaling the start of another fight with the White House over elections. The order, which would create a national list of voting-age American citizens and directs the U.S. Postal Service to place limits on mail-in ballots, constitutes an extraordinary and illegal attempt by Trump to intervene in the voting process, election experts said. he order is a "structural inversion” of how mail voting works, said Pamela Smith, president and CEO of Verified Voting, an organization that promotes the responsible use of technology in elections. USPS delivers mail and isn’t involved in distributing ballots, she said.“It is not up to the Postal Service to have this gatekeeping role over ballot delivery,” Smith said. Democrats sue to block Trump’s ‘unconstitutional’ mail ballot order | News From The States

National: The actual danger of Trump’s phony vote-by-mail executive order | Richard L. Hasen/Slate

Sometimes it’s the chaos, not the cruelty, that’s the point. That certainly seems true of President Donald Trump’s second executive order on elections, issued on Tuesday. The order purports, among other things, to direct the United States Department of Homeland Security to create a list of all U.S. citizens over 18, to supply that list to states, and for the United States Postal Service to refuse to accept mailed-in ballots from voters unless that voter’s name appears on a list of the state’s eligible voters that it has given USPS months before the election (a list which presumably the state would have to match with the DHS’ list, though that part—among many others!—is unclear). The order will face multiple court challenges and likely will be found unconstitutional by courts. Even if courts did not intervene before November, the multiple rulemakings and new procedures for DHS, USPS, and state and local election officials envisioned by the order would be impossible to implement before November’s elections. Indeed, the order is so underwhelming that it suggests Trump’s real purpose was not its implementation but to create more confusion and litigation around elections, further undermining voter confidence in the integrity of American elections. The actual danger of Trump’s phony vote-by-mail executive order.

National: Trump signs order directing creation of a national voter list | Seung Min Kim, Ali Swenson, Matt Brown, and Jonathan J. Cooper/Associated Press

President Donald Trump on Tuesday signed an executive order to create a nationwide list of verified eligible voters and to restrict mail-in voting, a move that swiftly drew legal threats from state Democratic officials ahead of this year’s midterm elections. The order, which voting law experts say violates the Constitution by attempting to seize states’ power to run elections, is the latest in a torrent of efforts from Trump to interfere with the way Americans vote based on his false allegations of fraud. The president has repeatedly lied about the outcome of the 2020 presidential campaign and the integrity of state-run elections, asserting again Tuesday that he won “three times” and citing accusations of voter fraud that numerous audits, investigations and courts have debunked. The order signed Tuesday calls on the Department of Homeland Security, working in conjunction with the Social Security Administration, to make the list of eligible voters in each state. It also seeks to bar the U.S. Postal Service from sending absentee ballots to those not on each state’s approved list. Trump signs order directing creation of a national voter list | AP NewsRead Article>

National: The Trump Administration’s Strategy for Reshaping Elections  | Michael McNulty/Just Security

The 2026 midterms will be a stress test for whether election outcomes are determined by the will of the voters or by who controls the machinery of elections. President Donald Trump and his allies have pursued a sequence of actions that, taken together, mirror strategies of democratic backsliding elsewhere, reshaping the rules, the referees, and the information environment to tilt the playing field before a single vote is cast. This playbook is not unique to the United States. I spent more than two decades working on elections in countries where – time and time again – democracy was eroded by those in power and where seizing control of elections was a key feature in the authoritarian playbook. For example, in Hungary, after decades of democratic norms, Viktor Orbán’s government gradually seized control of election administration, the courts, and the media — not in one dramatic move, but step-by-step. Independent election oversight bodies were weakened, the judiciary was stacked with loyalists, media outlets were consolidated under government-friendly ownership, and the rules governing elections were changed to favor the ruling party. Each change alone seemed small, but together they created a system where the playing field was heavily skewed toward the ruling party and voters’ voices were silenced. The warning from Hungary and other backsliding countries illustrates a consistent pattern: when leaders make their intentions explicit and begin coordinating an election takeover in public view, the window of time to defend democracy rapidly begins to shrink. Read Article

National: Trump’s anti-voting order will mean chaos for mail voters if left to stand, experts warn | Jim Saksa/Democracy Docket

President Donald Trump’s new executive order on elections would tie up millions of everyday Americans who vote by mail in tangles of red tape, experts in election administration said. And that’s assuming government officials could even implement it in time for the upcoming midterm elections. Implementing Trump’s diktat ahead of the November midterms is simply “not feasible,” said Pamela Smith, president and CEO of Verified Voting. “The order itself is so convoluted,” Smith added. “That’s not up to the Postal Service. You can’t make them the gatekeepers for ballot delivery. That’s not somehow refining an existing practice to make it better, or whatever — that just doesn’t work.” Trump’s anti-voting order will mean chaos for mail voters if left to stand, experts warn - Democracy Docket

National: Federal election observers once played a key role in securing voting rights for all − but times have changed | Allison Mashell Mitchell/The Conversation

President Donald Trump appeared on former Deputy FBI Director Dan Bongino’s podcast in February 2026, where he stated: “The Republicans should say, ‘We want to take over, we should take over the voting.’ The Republicans ought to nationalize the voting.” Trump’s call to nationalize elections, to transfer the constitutionally mandated control of elections from local to federal authorities, drew bipartisan opposition and added to Democratic fears that the president may attempt to interfere with upcoming midterm elections. Despite Trump’s call to “nationalize the voting,” the U.S. Constitution clearly notes that states run elections – not the federal government. The federal government, however, has a role to play in national elections – as an observer. Federal observation ensures that Americans cast their votes on election day without reprisal. Initially dispatched to deter voter discrimination against Black Americans after passage of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, election observers ensured that those qualified to vote could do so without trouble. Read Article

National: Privacy officer resigns as DOJ readies voter data for DHS | Jude Joffe-Block/NPR

As Justice Department officials are working to acquire sensitive voter registration data from states and have recently disclosed a plan to share it with the Department of Homeland Security, a key privacy officer in DOJ's division tasked with enforcing civil and voting rights laws has resigned. Kilian Kagle was the chief FOIA officer and senior component official for privacy for DOJ's Civil Rights Division before leaving his post in recent days. His resignation has not been previously reported. For nearly a year, the DOJ has been making unprecedented demands for sensitive voter data from most states – including voters' driver's license numbers, partial Social Security numbers, dates of birth and addresses – that some say violate privacy law. Read Article

National: Can you change your mind after you mail in your ballot? It depends. | Alexander Shur/Votebeat

When the U.S. Supreme Court last week took up the question of late-arriving mail ballots, the discussion turned to something more basic: when a vote becomes final. Justice Neil Gorsuch raised a hypothetical — whether a voter who has already mailed a ballot could change their mind and have a postal carrier cancel their delivery after learning new information about a candidate, even after Election Day. For Mississippi, the plaintiff in the case before the court, the answer was clear. The state’s Solicitor General Scott G. Stewart told the court that’s not possible there. Once a ballot is cast, it stays cast. The justices also spent significant time on the broader question of finality — whether voters ever get a second chance, or at least a way to undo a vote made too soon. In most states, they don’t, especially after a ballot has been received by election officials and tabulated. Read Article

A Serious Senate Debate About an Unserious Bill | Russell Berman and Yvonne Wingett Sanchez/The Atlantic

The United States has launched a war in Iran. Soaring gas prices are pounding an economy that many Americans already considered unaffordable. And the federal department responsible for protecting the homeland ran out of money more than a month ago. Naturally, the Senate is debating none of those things. Instead, Republicans in Congress’s upper chamber are spending this week trying—likely in vain—to pass a bill aimed at addressing President Trump’s yearslong obsession with his 2020 defeat. The proposal, known as the SAVE America Act, would require people to provide proof of citizenship when registering to vote and photo identification when casting their ballot. The legislation is ostensibly designed to toughen enforcement of a core tenet of American democracy that most election experts say is already rigorously enforced: the law that only U.S. citizens are eligible to vote in federal elections. But those same experts, along with Trump himself, view the SAVE America Act as much more far-reaching. If it’s passed, voting-rights experts contend, more than 20 million eligible voters could lose ready access to the polls, including many married women who have changed their name and young people who have moved out of state to attend college. A Serious Senate Debate About an Unserious Bill - The Atlantic

National: Where Trump Has Installed 2020 Election Deniers in Government | Alan Feuer, Nick Corasaniti and Alexandra Berzon/The New York Times

When President Trump sought to overturn his loss in the 2020 election and remain in power, resistance from within his own government helped to stop him. Top Justice Department officials rejected his specious claims that the vote had been marred by widespread fraud. Senior officials at the Department of Homeland Security refused to go along with his outlandish efforts to seize voting machines. Cybersecurity experts praised the count as secure, and the intelligence community sidestepped his requests to declare that foreign nations had interfered in the results. But Mr. Trump’s second term looks very different. The president has filled his administration with people who are sympathetic to his baseless claims that the presidential race more than five years ago was stolen. Read Article

National: Amendment to require photo ID to vote fails in Senate as Democrats object | Caitlin Yilek/CBS

An amendment that would require voters to show photo identification to cast a ballot failed to advance in the Senate on Thursday, despite Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer saying last week that Democrats were not opposed to such a requirement. The amendment to the elections bill needed 60 votes to advance. It was defeated in a 53 to 47 vote. The vote came during the second week of a marathon debate over a controversial elections bill known as the SAVE America Act, which would require proof of citizenship to register to vote and certain forms of photo ID to cast a ballot. The legislation does not have enough support to clear the 60-vote threshold in the upper chamber, but President Trump has dialed up the pressure on Senate Republicans to find a way to force it through. ReaD ARTICLE

National: Some States Already Preparing for Potential Supreme Court Ban on Late Ballots | Nick Corasaniti/The New York Times

Francisco Aguilar, the secretary of state in Nevada, stepped out of the Supreme Court in Washington on Monday, where justices had just heard arguments about the legality of counting mail votes that arrive after Election Day. He immediately called his top deputy. The court’s conservative majority had appeared deeply skeptical of the arguments for continuing the practice. So Mr. Aguilar’s message was urgent, he later said in an interview. He began listing things “we need to start working on and answering.” And in the middle of the midterm election season, they couldn’t wait for a decision to land — perhaps as late as June. “We have to provide a road map for the county clerks,” he said into the phone. Mr. Aguilar, a Democrat, is one of 18 top election officials in states and territories across the country bracing for the possibility that the Supreme Court will require major changes to election law just months before the midterm election in November. Part of the urgency: getting the message out to voters that late-arriving ballots may no longer be counted. Such a decision could affect hundreds of thousands of voters. Read Article

National: On cyber, local elections officials are ‘natural risk managers,’ says former CISA official | Colin Wood/StateScoop

Geoff Hale got his start in defending the nation’s elections infrastructure from cyberattacks in 2016. “I guess I can thank Russia for that,” he said, pointing to his work at the National Protection and Programs Directorate, which was two years later to be transformed into the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, the Department of Homeland Security division granted an expansive remit on coordinating and rallying technical and intelligence resources in response to cybersecurity threats, foreign and domestic. He recalled Russia’s successful cyberattacks in 2016 against the Democratic National Committee, but also lesser known cyber activity aimed at state governments. Much has changed over the past decade, including the level of support offered by the federal cyber agency created during Donald Trump’s first presidency. Federal support for state and local governments has been slashed broadly, including for programs that would aid local election officials as they prepare for the midterm elections and the 2028 presidential race. Read Article

National: Republican states are pushing through their own versions of the SAVE America Act | Andrew Howard/Politico

As the Senate continues to stall on the SAVE America Act, Republicans in a number of states are moving forward with plans to add citizenship requirements to their voting laws. Six states are likely to vote on new measures this fall that echo President Donald Trump’s top legislative priority. Republican lawmakers in Arkansas, Kansas, South Dakota and West Virginia have put various citizenship-related amendments on the ballot. In West Virginia, the most recent state to put a measure on the ballot, the amendment would change the state’s constitution from saying “citizens of the state shall be entitled to vote,” to “only citizens of the state who are citizens of the United States are entitled to vote.” Read Article

National: Trump’s voter crackdown reaches college campuses | Bianca Quilantan/Politico

College campuses are already getting a taste of President Donald Trump’s effort to impose broad, new voting restrictions across the country. While Trump’s push for a partisan elections bill faces several bottlenecks on Capitol Hill, his administration has spent months quietly chipping away at programs designed to boost turnout among a voting bloc Republicans say lean Democratic. Colleges play a critical role in helping students vote in what is often their first chance to cast a ballot. But the Trump administration is barring colleges from using a federal program that employs low-income students to register voters and threatening to investigate schools if they use data from a nonpartisan student voting study to help boost turnout. Read Article

National: Trump said he voted by mail in Florida because he ‘should be’ in D.C. He cast his ballot from Palm Beach. | Irie Sentner/Politico

President Donald Trump — a relentless critic of mail-in voting — said Thursday that he voted by mail in Florida’s special elections this month because he felt he should be in Washington D.C. “instead of being in the beautiful sunshine. Because of the fact that I’m president of the United States, I did a mail-in ballot for elections that took place in Florida, because I felt I should be here instead of being in the beautiful sunshine,” Trump told reporters at the White House during Thursday’s Cabinet meeting. Reminded that he is often in Palm Beach at his Mar-a-Lago estate, Trump responded: “I decided that I was going to vote by mail-in ballot because I couldn’t be there, because I had a lot of different things.” But the president cast his mail-in vote from Palm Beach, records show. Read Article

National: ICE agents have been deployed to airports. Are the polls next? | Gabe Cohen/CNN

The high-profile deployment of Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents to airports has renewed support on the right and fear on the left about the possibility of ICE going to the polls in November. Steve Bannon is urging President Donald Trump — who surprised officials in his own administration this weekend by ordering ICE agents to airports to help alleviate long lines — to treat that move as a dress rehearsal for the 2026 midterms, arguing the same armed officers should ultimately be positioned around polling places. “We can use this as a test run — a test case — to really perfect ICE’s involvement in the 2026 midterm election,” Bannon, a longtime Trump ally, said Monday on his “War Room” podcast, reiterating his past calls for a law enforcement presence at the polls. While Bannon holds no official role in the administration, his remarks reignited concerns among some election officials and Democratic lawmakers who fear the Trump administration could try to use ICE as a political weapon — intimidating voters and potentially suppressing turnout in November. They argue that kind of presence at polling sites could run afoul of federal law. Read Article

National: Trump’s push for Save America Act could hurt Republicans | Amy B Wang, Scott Clement and Lydia Sidhom/The Washington Post

President Donald Trump has ramped up pressure on Republicans in recent weeks to pass the Save America Act, a bill that would require people to provide proof of citizenship to register to vote and to show photo identification at the polls, among other voting restrictions. Trump has gone so far as to declare that he will not sign any other legislation until Congress passes the bill, and vowed Tuesday never to endorse anyone who voted against what he dubbed “one of the most IMPORTANT & CONSEQUENTIAL pieces of legislation in the history of Congress.” He promised Republican lawmakers last week that passing the bill would “guarantee the midterms” for the GOP. But the bill might not help Republicans as much as Trump thinks. It is already illegal for noncitizens to vote in federal elections. Requiring Americans to prove they are citizens when they register to vote, in an effort to root out the extremely rare cases of noncitizen voting, would throw up roadblocks to the polls for millions of eligible voters across the political spectrum, and in some cases could hurt Republicans more. Read Article

Why the SAVE America Act . . . Won’t | The Wall Street Journal Editorial Board

For partisan hype, it’s hard to beat the Senate debate this week on the SAVE America Act. President Trump says the legislation is a salvation from mass voter fraud. Sen. Chuck Schumer says it’s an effort at mass voter suppression, “Jim Crow 2.0.” Neither is reality. Also, Republicans don’t have the votes to clear the Senate’s filibuster. And if they bully the bill through anyway, Democrats eyeing the end of the 60-vote rule will quietly celebrate. The House version of the SAVE America Act, which passed last month, has two main planks. First, people registering to vote would be asked to show proof of U.S. citizenship, such as a passport, birth certificate or naturalization document. Many driver’s licenses wouldn’t qualify. While the bill says it would accept a REAL ID “that indicates the applicant is a citizen,” standard license designs often don’t say. Legal immigrants can get REAL IDs, too. “Enhanced” driver’s licenses do show citizenship, and those can be used to cross international borders. But they’re available in only five states that neighbor Canada, according to the Department of Homeland Security. To pick one state, Minnesota says it has issued 782,000 “enhanced” licenses, out of a total 4.7 million active credentials. Read Article

National: ‘It’s laughable’: Election officials pour cold water on MAGA midterm overhaul | Sam Brodey/The Boston Globe

President Trump and his Republican allies in Congress are increasingly intent on a massive overhaul of the country’s elections in time for the 2026 midterms. But an important group of people are warning that’s not possible: the professionals who actually run those elections. Around the country, state and local election administrators have been warily eyeing the proposed changes contained in the Save America Act, as Republicans escalate their effort to pass it. Among its sweeping proposals: mandating voters prove their citizenship in person to register to vote and also show a photo ID to vote at the polls; and ending mail-in ballots for nearly all voters. Combined, those measures could block millions of eligible voters from the polls, according to analysis from voting rights advocates. Read Article

National: In bid for voter data, Trump’s DOJ lays groundwork to undermine confidence in midterms | Jonathan Shorman/Stateline

The U.S. Department of Justice has begun connecting its push to obtain sensitive personal data on millions of voters to whether the upcoming midterm elections will be fair and secure, laying the groundwork for the Trump administration to potentially cast doubt on the results. The Justice Department has sued 29 states and the District of Columbia over their refusal to provide unredacted voter rolls that include the driver’s license and partial Social Security numbers of voters. The department has lost three of those lawsuits so far this year. But as the Justice Department begins appealing the losses, it has filed emergency motions warning the “security and sanctity of elections” would be questioned in those states — California, Michigan and Oregon — without immediate rulings. Read Article

National: The Trump administration is falsely claiming Jimmy Carter was against mail-in voting | Melissa Goldin/Associated Press

The Trump administration is using a 20-year-old report to misrepresent former President Jimmy Carter’s views on mail-in and absentee ballots as it pushes for federal legislation that would impose strict new proof-of-citizenship and photo ID requirements for voting ahead of the midterm elections. There’s no evidence that mail-in voting fraud was rampant then, and it’s not rampant now,” said Mark Lindeman, policy and strategy director at Verified Voting, a nonpartisan group focused on election technology. “Mail voting has become more common and more mature. So, over that period of time, states have learned from each other — best practices for not only avoiding fraud, but just generally administering mail balloting well.” For example, ballot tracking, curing ballots that had initially been rejected, and the ability to identify and address duplicate voter registrations have improved. Read Article

National: Trump’s emergency elections order is ‘being prepared,’ key ally believes | Matt Cohen/Democracy Docket

An anti-voting activist said to be part of a group pushing for President Donald Trump to take control of elections via executive order reiterated his view that the scheme is “being prepared.” “I think Plan A has always been an executive order from President Trump based on the fact that the Chinese penetrated and influenced the 2020 election,” Jerome Corsi — an election denier best known for spreading Barack Obama birtherism conspiracies — said Wednesday on a right-wing podcast. “I believe Donald Trump is resolute on this,” Corsi added. “He’s not going to allow the 2026 midterm elections to be stolen without taking some strong executive action and executive order.” Read Article

Trump’s Gutting of Election Security Fuels Worries for Midterms | Adam Sella/The New York Times

When election officials in Arizona opened their online candidate portal last summer, it was immediately clear that it had been hacked. The photos of aspiring public servants had been replaced by red and black images of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, Iran’s first supreme leader. fter similar episodes in recent years, state officials often contacted the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, or CISA, the primary federal agency responsible for election cybersecurity. The agency, created by President Trump in 2018 to protect critical infrastructure, including elections, from cyberthreats, would have lent resources to stop the attackers and notified other election officials across the country so they could bolster their defenses. But after the hack last summer, Adrian Fontes, Arizona’s Democratic secretary of state, decided not to ask for CISA’s help. Arizona officials managed to stop the cyberattack, restore the website and ensure that no sensitive voter data had been compromised, though CISA might have been able to help them work faster and cheaper. nytimes.com

National: Conservative voter fraud hunters pitch new computer programs to state officials | Jane C. Timm/NBC

The creators of a controversial program designed to hunt for voter fraud that was promoted by conservative activists are pitching two new programs to state election officials ahead of the midterms. The first election software from Dr. John W. “Rick” Richards Jr. and his son, John W. Richards III, called EagleAI, promised to help officials and activists root out inaccurate voter registrations in the run-up to the 2024 election. The program was embraced by members of the Election Integrity Network, the group founded by Cleta Mitchell, a former election lawyer for President Donald Trump. But it was also criticized as inaccurate by election officials and experts, as well as some of the activists who tried it. Now, the father-son duo is back with two new programs: ELLY and Psephos. They have pitched election officials in Missouri, North Carolina and Rhode Island. Read Article

Trump is undermining the people who run our elections. Here’s how we can fight back | Pamela Smith/Democracy Docket

There is a group of Americans who wake up every day thinking about one thing: making sure your vote counts. They are county clerks, local election directors, state officials — largely nonpartisan, often underpaid, working out of government buildings or strip mall offices you’ve driven past a hundred times without noticing. They are the infrastructure of democracy. And right now, they are under pressure unlike anything most of them have ever seen. In a functioning version of American democracy, the federal government helps election administrators do their job. It funds cybersecurity support. It coordinates the collection and analysis of threat information and helps share it with election officials. But it also respects constitutional boundaries and stays in its lane, because the structure of American elections — decentralized, state-run — exists for a reason. We are not living in that version right now. And none of what has followed is normal. Read Article

National: Thune Is in a Vise as Trump and Far Right Demand Fight on Voter Bill | Carl Hulse/The New York Times

John Thune likes to be liked. So it is a bit uncomfortable for him, as the gregarious Senate majority leader from South Dakota, to be the subject of an outpouring of conservative venom for his resistance to mounting an old-school filibuster to try to force through a voter identification law that President Trump is demanding. Mr. Thune says the votes just aren’t there for the legislation, which is headed to the floor as soon as next week. Unfortunately for Mr. Thune, who finds his Republican majority under increasing midterm threat in the second year of his stewardship, the standard Senate strategy for handling a bill that lacks enough votes to advance — forcing a show vote to put opponents on the record saying no — is not enough to satisfy the president or the bill’s fervid supporters. They have instigated a firestorm of pressure online in an effort to push the majority leader to wage a bigger battle. Read Article