|
Top headlines
Lead story
For months now, I’ve been reading headlines – and I’m sure you have, too – which have begun to sound more like the Abbott and Costello baseball comedy routine “Who’s on First?” than about something coherent and weighty.
Here’s what I’ve been seeing: The Department of Justice was demanding voter data, including personal information, from states. States X, Y and Z said, “Nope, you can’t have all that stuff.” One state official literally told the DOJ to “pound sand.” Others gave the information willingly. The DOJ sued some states.
What was going on? This is why it’s great to work at The Conversation. It was my job to find a scholar to figure this out, on the assumption that I was not the only confused news consumer. Today, election law scholar John J. Martin, who teaches at Quinnipiac University, untangles the whole situation for you – and me.
“This battle over voter data has raised numerous questions about the Trump administration’s motives, the legality of its actions and, more generally, the role of the federal government in election administration,” writes Martin. He also explains why the DOJ will face many challenges making the case that all its demands are “constitutionally legitimate.”
One last note: We are very grateful to all of our readers who helped make our spring fundraising campaign a success. Your support helps sustain our work and increase our impact. It’s a key factor in how we’ve become, according to a recent article from Harvard’s Nieman Journalism Lab, the most-read nonprofit news outlet in the United States for the eight straight month. Thank you.
|
