Today’s decision continues a generational project of denying Black political power and fair representation. The right to fair maps and equal votes in our elections is a core American freedom.

Louisiana v. Callais opens the door to even more schemes to deny our votes and power. It comes amid an electoral power grab ahead of the 2026 midterm elections. We’ve seen partisan election officials in North Carolina and around the country cater to the whims of an administration scheming to change the rules instead of earning votes.

What started with Shelby County v. Holder in 2013 continues as the Court’s far-right majority working overtime to realign power away from our communities. And while the latest decision removed a key check on abuse of power and rigging outcomes, our votes still matter.

If our votes didn’t matter, the opposition wouldn’t work so hard to deny us. We, the people, have always been the check and balance on these abusive systems.

The Voting Rights Act was a debt owed to Black America paid for with the blood and sweat of our ancestors. We remain clear in our commitment to defending voting rights and fair maps, and electing leaders who will work for policies grounded in the needs of our people.

Recent articles covering the popularity of alleged SAVE America Act provisions fail to tell the full story. Headlines and reporting that frame people’s support for voter ID or citizenship verification as evidence of support for anti-democracy restrictions aren’t the flex some may think.

Most poll questions don’t provide people the background, context, or implications of the policies being asked about. It might be important for people to know that laws concerning voter ID and citizenship already exist.

And the polls aren’t asking whether people support the motivation and manipulation of information behind these proposals.

Blocking voters and our power is the goal. It’s not about security or integrity.

Election safety versus voting rights is a fake dichotomy set up to trick people into believing that giving away some of our rights will keep us safe. Since his return to office, the current president has made it very clear he wants to stack the deck so that he and his allies never lose again.

He has made numerous statements about wanting to take over elections, driven by his need for absolute power. In the past month, he has listed the same provisions being pushed in polls as a part of his voter suppression agenda.

He also bragged that his party could stay in control for another 50 years after his agenda is passed. All of this matters when people are being asked questions out of context.

Here’s what’s missing from articles and headlines about people’s support for SAVE Act provisions:

1. We already have laws and standards for voter eligibility and election administration

The way SAVE Act supporters carry on, you wouldn’t know there are already laws on the books that address everything they claim is a problem. American voters already have to confirm citizenship to register to vote. Improper voting, whether by non-citizens or due to other eligibility issues, already carries heavy penalties.

The National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (NVRA) set national standards for voter registration and voter list maintenance.

Sometimes called the “motor voter” law, the NVRA expanded how people could register to vote, opening the door to registration through the DMV or other government agencies. NVRA standards for voter list roll maintenance ensure transparent, accurate, and fair practices that balance necessary updates with voters’ rights.

Having more people registered is a good thing, unless you are obsessed with power and controlling election outcomes. More eligible people registering and voting is exactly why the right has spent almost 20 years fearmongering and repeating lies about virtually non-existent fraud.

The Help America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA) implemented additional safeguards and practices that provide a baseline for all states.

But the SAVE America Act would ban online and mail-in voter registration, methods used by 94% of eligible voters, making it harder to register to vote or make required changes.

2. States already have citizenship safeguards in place

Again, states have safeguards in place for voter eligibility and election administration. Every state, except North Dakota, requires a declaration of citizenship when registering, under penalty of perjury or other punishment. North Dakota is the only state without voter registration.

In 36 states, voters must show some form of ID to vote. This varies from states that require a strict photo ID to others that allow people to show other forms of official documentation.

The 14 states that do not require voter ID use other forms of verification, such as signing sworn statements. Sworn statements and attestations are made under penalty of perjury and punishment.

The SAVE America Act’s voter ID requirements would nationalize the most restrictive policies and make it difficult for many voters to cast ballots. Student IDs and other forms acceptable in most states would be banned. Tribal IDs would be permitted only if they have an expiration date, but most don’t.

Most people’s Real IDs would not meet the act’s requirements for establishing citizenship. Only five states offer an “enhanced” license that notes citizenship status. And none of them are in the south.

While some discount the impact of voter ID laws, we’ve seen how even a few hundred votes can swing an election. Blocking even a “fraction” of voters or making thousands unnecessarily use provisional ballots can make the difference between electing a democracy champion and an election denier.

Again, federal law already prohibits non-citizens from voting in federal elections. It’s been illegal for decades. And non-citizens are not allowed to vote in federal elections.

3. It would have negative impacts on voter registration and vote-by-mail

According to democracy experts, the SAVE America Act’s requirement to submit documentary proof of citizenship in person would effectively eliminate online and mail-in voter registration. These two methods are used by an estimated 94% of Americans.

It would create barriers for voters across the board, including voters with disabilities, military families, and students. Can’t get off of work in time to register or update your registration? Tough luck.

The law would also significantly limit eligibility for mail-in voting in federal elections, including in states with universal vote-by-mail. It would also require people to submit a photocopy of their ID when requesting an absentee ballot and when returning the ballot.

4. Proof of citizenship laws are a trap and could block millions from the ballot

As widely reported, an estimated 21 million people lack the required citizenship documents to meet the law’s requirements. The fixation on citizenship is another way to create barriers for otherwise eligible voters. Reports indicate that citizenship review databases have incorrectly flagged people.

But that’s exactly why these laws are being pursued.

According to Mother Jones, in the first three years of a similar Kansas law, it blocked an estimated 31,000 otherwise eligible voters. It also led to the cancellation of another 16,000 voter registrations. A federal judge struck down the law as unconstitutional in 2018.

To date, only a handful of states have enacted documentary proof-of-citizenship laws.

It’s worth repeating that non-citizen voting and other forms of alleged fraud are extremely rare. And yet, we’ve been inundated with unfounded claims of alleged voter fraud or non-citizen voting for nearly 20 years.

Despite investigations and analyses consistently showing no evidence of the alleged mass fraud, those on the right continue to push for restrictive laws. Expert reviews of available voter data continue to show very few cases of reported fraud out of millions of votes cast across multiple election periods. Even conservative think tanks and researchers have found only a tiny number of reports out of billions of votes.

By some estimates, being struck by lightning is more common than so-called voter fraud.

And Trump and his allies at the state and federal levels know this. But they know fear is a motivator and can be used to deny eligible voters their right to free, fair, and accessible elections.

5. Promotes aggressive voter purges and increases election administration burdens

Despite the new requirements, no additional funding has been earmarked for state implementation and system upgrades. It would create chaos and confusion ahead of the 2026 midterm elections, with little time for election staff training and compliance.

Thirty states have refused the Trump administration’s heavy-handed demand for access to our full, unredacted voter data. Remember when, during the height of the ICE siege in the Twin Cities, Attorney General Pam Bondi basically told Minnesota’s governor all he had to do was comply with the voter roll demand, and ICE would leave him alone?

Trump is trying to use Congress to force the states to do what federal courts won’t. The SAVE America Act would also require all states to hand over their data to the Department of Homeland Security for its citizen check review.

It’s a shakedown, and we should be appalled. And even the Trump administration’s own data review of 49.5 million voter registrations from 2024 found that only 0.02% of registrations were referred for additional investigation.

That doesn’t mean people were voting; just that their names were flagged. As Campaign Legal Center previously explained, aggressive purges like this make mistakes and are more likely to remove otherwise eligible voters than alleged non-citizens.

The existing system, also known as SAVE, cannot be used to verify the citizenship of U.S. citizens because it is for immigration review. It’s also outdated. So naturalized citizens, who have the right to vote, could be incorrectly flagged as non-citizens.

Think about all the personal information collected about us. Do you really want that sitting in a government database to be used however this administration and its rich friends see fit? The Brennan Center highlighted concerns about the security of the collected data and vague references to outside contractors who may have access to it.

The law also imposes criminal penalties on election officials and workers who do not comply. And it incentivizes snitching and frivolous lawsuits by allowing people to sue if they don’t think the law is being enforced correctly.

This is very different from the private right of action under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act (VRA), which allows people to challenge discrimination in voting processes or election administration. The proposed SAVE America Act provisions could embolden threats, attacks, and harassment of election officials and workers.

6. SAVE America Act provisions are a part of Trump’s voter suppression mandate

The SAVE America Act is a fake solution for issues that aren’t a real threat to our elections. And the so-called solutions put forth are barriers to millions of eligible voters. The real threat is a president and members of his party who continue to erode ballot access and voting rights.

Now, nearly 20 years after a bipartisan majority last reauthorized the Voting Rights Act, we are facing the greatest threat to our right to vote. Championed provisions around voter ID and proof of citizenship have nothing to do with election protection or security.

This law is a voter suppression fever dream with provisions proven to shave off thousands of eligible voters or block millions from even being able to apply to participate. We know firsthand the difference a few hundred votes, let alone a few thousand, can make in determining the outcome of an election.

Popular opinion is not always a good guide to which rights should be protected. Take a look at old opinion polls — racism, sexism, and other forms of oppression have been quite popular, but still wrong.

Simple fact checks, without context, do not help people understand the grave stakes for millions of voters and for our democracy overall. But context matters, and the SAVE America Act cannot be reduced to hot takes about polls saying people want this.

​
Last night’s primary election in North Carolina was a clear reminder that community engagement and grassroots organizing continue to shape the direction of our state. It also underscored the undeniable power of a unified Black community, which continues to play a decisive role in shaping elections and advancing leadership that reflects the priorities of OUR communities. No one should take the Black vote for granted, especially incumbents who think their misdeeds in Raleigh can be hidden from their district.

Advance Carolina congratulates the candidates we endorsed who secured victories in their primary races: Roy Cooper (U.S. Senate), Valerie Foushee (U.S. House N.C. District 4), Alma Adams(U.S. House N.C. District 12), Raymond Smith (U.S. House N.C. District 3), Rev. Dr. Rodney Sadler (N.C. House District 106), Rodney Pierce (N.C. House District 27) and Satana Deberry (District Attorney – Durham).

The race in the 4th Congressional District drew national attention and significant spending. Outside groups spent over $4 million on advertising and messaging — making it one of the most expensive primaries in North Carolina history. Any investments made in our elections should be grounded in community and sustained efforts that inform, engage, and empower voters in every election cycle. Election outcomes should be shaped by the voices and priorities of local communities.

Grassroots organizing across North Carolina

Over the past several weeks, our team has been on the ground across the state — connecting with OUR communities, listening to what matters most and helping voters make a plan to participate in the primary election.

Together we:

• Knocked 76,362 doors across 23 counties
• Made 267,052 voter contacts through traditional phone banking and our Emerging Voter Program

​These conversations are about more than a single election. They are about building long-term civic participation, strengthening community voice and preparing for the critical election ahead.

Over the past year, we also led an accountability campaign across our digital platforms, including district accountability town halls and coordinated advocacy at the North Carolina General Assembly through our policy network, generating over 11,600 views.

As we look toward the general election this November, Advance Carolina will continue investing in the relationships and organizing that bring us closer to the people.

As 2026 gets underway, North Carolina lawmakers have returned to session without a finalized state budget. North Carolina is currently the last state in the country operating without one.

The ongoing delay has created uncertainty across multiple systems, including education, health care and higher education, with impacts already being felt by workers and families statewide.

What the budget delay means for North Carolinians

Without a state budget in place, funding decisions remain stalled, affecting essential services and public employees.

Educators remain in limbo regarding pay increases that were proposed in both the House and Senate versions of last year’s budget. With no final agreement, raises have not been implemented, prompting growing concern about retention as some educators consider leaving the profession due to financial instability.

Major health care projects are also at a standstill. Plans for a new children’s hospital have not moved forward despite an ongoing provider shortage in North Carolina and across the country. Delays in capital funding limit the state’s ability to expand access to care.

Institutions within the UNC System are operating under outdated funding levels that do not reflect current enrollment growth. The mismatch between student population increases and available funding has delayed staff raises and expansion projects needed to support students.

The lack of a state budget, combined with federal Medicaid cuts, has raised additional concerns about the stability of North Carolina’s health care coverage system. Together, these factors increase the risk of coverage gaps and reduced access to services.

Budget action unlikely before spring

While calls for a finalized budget persist, lawmakers are not expected to resume negotiations until April. That timeline leaves many North Carolinians facing continued uncertainty for at least another quarter.

Primary elections offer opportunity for voter engagement

In the meantime, North Carolinians have an opportunity to participate in the state’s upcoming primary elections.

Primary Election Day is March 3, with early voting beginning Feb. 12. Voters are encouraged to check their registration status, confirm polling locations and make a plan to vote.

Election information and voting resources are available at SafeVoterNC.org.

Jovita Lee, Ed.D. is the policy director for Advance Carolina and convener of the North Carolina Black and Brown Policy Network. Her advocacy and policy work focuses on equity for Black and Brown communities, operating on both state and national levels.

Sunday voting has long served as a vital access point for Black voters in North Carolina, especially through “Souls to the Polls” traditions led by our churches, communities and civic organizations. For many working families, Sunday provides the only real opportunity to cast a ballot without sacrificing wages or family responsibilities. Stripping away this option disproportionately impacts Black voters and reflects the same discriminatory pattern that the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals recognized in 2016. In North Carolina State Conference of NAACP v. McCrory, the court found that state officials had intentionally eliminated Sunday voting because it was used disproportionately by Black voters, calling this evidence “as close to a smoking gun as we are likely to see” of racial discrimination in voting restrictions.

The decision gives county boards the option, but in many rural counties, Sunday voting is the largest challenge that often gets elevated to the state board. We must also remind voters of the monster voter ID law, where these very restrictions were first introduced and ultimately defeated in court. This new board may need an orientation to these challenges if its goal is to continue undermining the will of voters.

CJ Brinson, faith organizer for Advance Carolina, stated:

“It pains me to see yet another lever used to deny justice to those whom Howard Thurman describes as ‘having their backs against the wall.’ When we consider the long history of denying  Black people the most basic rights – liberty, justice and the pursuit of happiness — the elimination of Sunday voting shows that leaders in North Carolina are still not interested in liberation or repair.
 
If society were truly serious about democracy, there would actually be no barrier to any person who wants to cast a ballot. Even as I grieve this decision, I hold fast to the vision of a  Beloved Community where we will all be free”.

While we acknowledge the NCBOE’s decision not to comply with the Trump administration’s request for North Carolina voter data — which could have further politicized our elections — this step cannot overshadow the damage caused by rolling back Sunday voting access.

Our democracy should be about removing barriers, not creating new ones. Every eligible voter deserves fair and equitable access to the ballot box. Early voting days have already been reduced, and eliminating Sunday voting compounds the harm by leaving fewer opportunities for voters to cast their ballots.

Now is not the time to remain silent. We call on local county boards of elections to preserve Sunday early voting in their election plans and on all North Carolinians to join us in demanding that voting remain accessible to every community.

Last week marked a major milestone at the N.C. General Assembly—Crossover Day, the legislative deadline by which most bills must pass from one chamber to the other to remain viable this session.

We’ve been tracking key bills throughout the session. Here are just a few you should know about:

• Attacks on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion: House Bill 171 bans state agencies, schools, and local governments from implementing or funding Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) programs. It threatens to pull public funding from institutions that continue this critical work.
• Criminalizing Voter Registration: House Bill 127 would make it a crime for organizations to engage in community-based voter registration if even small errors occur. While exempt from the crossover deadline, this bill remains a top concern.
• Undermining the Separation of Powers: Senate Bill 58 strips the N.C. Attorney General of the power to challenge presidential executive orders. This would severely limit the state’s ability to act as a check on federal overreach.
• Book banning: House Bill 636 would require public schools to adopt strict criteria for what books are allowed in school libraries and allow any county resident, not just parents, to challenge materials they consider “unwholesome.” The bill goes even further by allowing these individuals to sue schools that don’t comply. In effect, this legislation paves the way for widespread book bans under the guise of community standards.

TAKE ACTION

This is a critical moment to stay informed and get involved. Contact your legislator today to share your concerns about these harmful bills and urge them to stand up for our communities.

House Bill 171 is a blatantly unconstitutional piece of legislation that undermines the principles of justice, fairness, and opportunity that our laws are meant to uphold. This bill directly conflicts with existing protections designed to ensure that all individuals—regardless of identity or background—have access to the resources and opportunities they need to succeed.

Why Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) Matters

DEI programs and policies are not just ethical imperatives—they are legal necessities. These initiatives cover a wide range of fundamental protections, including:

• Safeguarding individuals from workplace harassment
• Ensuring pay equity and transparency
• Providing accommodations for individuals with disabilities
• Guaranteeing job security for new parents

When individual needs are met in a fair and just manner, employees thrive, workplaces are more productive, and society as a whole benefits. Yet, HB 171 seeks to dismantle these critical protections under the false pretense of prioritizing ‘merit’ over ‘equity.’

The False Dichotomy Between Merit and Equity

One of the most misleading narratives promoted by supporters of HB 171 is the idea that DEI and merit-based systems are inherently at odds. In reality, they are deeply interconnected. A so-called ‘pure meritocracy,’ as defined by this bill’s sponsors, would do nothing more than maintain the existing status quo, where structural inequalities persist and those who have historically held power continue to benefit the most.

Consider this: White households hold approximately 80% of the wealth in the United States. Without equitable opportunities, a meritocratic system only reinforces these disparities rather than addressing them. True meritocracy cannot exist without ensuring that everyone has a fair chance to compete.

A Call to Action

Advance Carolina and the North Carolina Black and Brown Policy Network strongly oppose HB 171, as it is fundamentally at odds with our core values. We refuse to stand by while policies are introduced that stifle diversity, limit opportunity, and prevent qualified individuals from contributing their skills and perspectives to our communities.

We urge all concerned citizens to speak out against this dangerous bill and contact their representatives. The future of a fair and just society depends on our collective commitment to equity, inclusion and opportunity for all.

In recent weeks, state and federal policymakers have introduced legislation that could have far-reaching consequences for democracy, voting rights and legal oversight in North Carolina. Among the most concerning bills are SB 58 and HB 72, which seek to restrict the Attorney General’s authority, and the federal SAVE Act, which would impose strict voter registration requirements. 

SB 58 and HB 72: Restricting the Attorney General’s Authority

SB 58 and HB 72, titled the AG Restrict Challenge to Presidential Executive Orders Bill. This bill expands the legal proceedings in which the Attorney General is barred from participating under GS 114-2.8, including challenges that would invalidate an executive order issued by the President of the United States. Additionally, it broadens the scope of restrictions beyond foreign litigation, limiting state legal actions against federal policies.

This legislation appears to be a knee-jerk reaction to a multi-state lawsuit that North Carolina, along with 22 other states, has joined to challenge the current administration’s executive orders. These orders address critical issues such as birthright citizenship, funding cuts to the National Institutes of Health (NIH), and federal funding freezes for states. SB 58 and HB 72 undermine North Carolina’s ability to advocate for its residents by stripping the Attorney General’s ability to contest such federal actions. Both bills are currently under review in their respective rules committees.

The SAVE Act: A Modern-Day Poll Tax

The Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act at the federal level introduces stringent new voter registration requirements. The SAVE Act would require voters to present a birth certificate or U.S. passport to prove their citizenship when registering (or re-registering) to vote in federal elections. While the bill technically applies only to federal elections, it would allow North Carolina lawmakers to enact a similar law for state elections. 

This legislation is particularly concerning because it imposes financial barriers that disproportionately impact Black voters and other voters of color. For many individuals, obtaining the required documents presents a significant cost burden—new passports cost $165, and ordering a birth certificate can cost up to $60. Additionally, the SAVE Act will upend voter registration drives and prevent voter registration online or by mail, as individuals must show proof of citizenship documentation in person. This change would create an unnecessary administrative burden for already underfunded and overwhelmed election officials.

How You Can Take Action

While these legislative developments are alarming, there are immediate steps you can take to fight back:

• Oppose SB 58 and HB 72: Call State Senator Settle and House Representative Kidwell and demand that they allow the Attorney General to do the job they were elected to do rather than unjustly stripping power from state offices.
• Fight the SAVE Act: Contact members of the North Carolina Congressional Delegation and urge them to vote NO on the SAVE Act. Our partners at Democracy NC have made it easy to take action with just a few clicks. Find the link to the call-to-action in the description.
• Stay informed: As these bills progress, follow us on Facebook, Instagram, Threads and Bluesky for the latest updates on policy developments.

Resources

• SB 58/HB 72: Read more here
• SAVE Act Action Alert: Take action here

Jovita Lee, Ed.D. is the policy director for Advance Carolina and convener of the North Carolina Black and Brown Policy Network. Her advocacy and policy work focuses on equity for Black and Brown communities, operating on both state and national levels.

In recent days, many of you have seen or heard about the new administration’s slate of executive orders. While several of these orders warrant close attention, we’re focusing on those with the most significant implications for climate and the environment: the withdrawal from the Paris Climate Agreement and the “Unleashing American Energy” executive order.

Withdrawing from the Paris Climate Agreement

One of the most concerning orders seeks to withdraw the United States from the Paris Climate Agreement. This decision would place the U.S. among a small group of nations—alongside Iran, Yemen, and Libya—that remain outside this global pact. The agreement is designed to combat climate change by reducing carbon emissions on a global scale.

If this order proceeds, it will mean abandoning the ambitious goal of reducing toxic emissions by 66% by 2025. Additionally, it will halt promised payments to under-resourced countries, funds that were critical for helping these nations transition to clean energy solutions. However, it’s important to note that this move will not affect the U.S.’s participation in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.

Misleading Messaging: The “Unleashing American Energy” Executive Order

Another key executive order, titled “Unleashing American Energy,” may sound promising, but its implications tell a different story. This order instructs agency heads to halt the disbursement of funds allocated through the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA).

The IRA, passed under the previous administration, was a groundbreaking piece of legislation aimed at investing in clean energy projects and addressing climate-related challenges, particularly in Black, Brown, and low-income communities through the Justice40 initiative. Under the new order, agencies must submit spending reports to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the National Economic Council, aligning their disbursements with the new administration’s vision for energy policy.

Declaring an Energy Emergency

The new administration has also declared a national energy emergency. While this may sound urgent and necessary, it’s being used as a pathway to bypass permitting and approval processes. This declaration could fast-track fossil fuel production projects while excluding cleaner energy sources, further solidifying reliance on nonrenewable resources.

What You Can Do

These are just a few of the executive orders that demand our attention. We encourage you to review the complete list of executive orders to understand their full scope and implications.

It’s also worth noting that several of these orders will likely face legal challenges, which could alter their implementation and impact. We will continue to monitor the viability and consequences of these actions because these decisions affect not only the present but also the environmental future of our communities and our planet.

Climate and Environment Resources

Jovita Lee, Ed.D. is the policy director for Advance Carolina and convener of the North Carolina Black and Brown Policy Network. Her advocacy and policy work focuses on environmental justice for Black and Brown communities, operating on both state and national levels.

Black voters across the state sent a clear message that they would not tolerate politics of division and policies that undermine our families, our freedoms and our futures. Despite the disappointing loss in the presidential race, Black voters showed up and chose community over chaos, leading to Black state legislative candidates winning historic representation, breaking the GOP supermajority and restoring veto power for Governor-elect Josh Stein. And for the first time, North Carolina has a Black state superintendent of public instruction. 

Building on our successful regional organizing efforts, Advance Carolina expanded infrastructure investments across urban and rural communities. Since June 2024, our teams prioritized direct voter contacts in 21 counties, including Wake, Mecklenburg, Guilford, Pasquotank and Cumberland. Heading into Election Day, the organization had knocked on 271,491 doors throughout North Carolina, ranking sixth among all organizations doing voter outreach. Working alongside other progressive organizations, Advance Carolina independently reached over 4.7 million voters, demonstrating both efficiency and effectiveness. The expanded community presence and other diverse activations offered education about changes to the election process.​

“The results of the 2024 elections are reminders that Black voters should never be taken for granted because their political participation continues to be the resounding voice of reason in our country,” said Marcus Bass, executive director of Advance Carolina. “We know that defending our freedoms and moving policies closer to the people requires blocking divisive rhetoric and extremist policies and the candidates who push them. 

“It would be irresponsible not to mention the enduring underinvestment in the sustained organizing and mobilization of Black voters, a core base constituency for transformative candidates and policies cannot be overcome in one cycle. We expand our coalition by organizing everywhere and investing in potential voters dismissed as being apathetic or disengaged. 

“Elections are an inflection point, not the end. This election also serves as a reminder that data points without context cannot replace the deep knowledge and lessons of our communities. We will continue to work with our partners across the state and maintain the sustained engagement necessary to bring impactful policies closer to the people.”