In the News

Chiraag Bains of the advocacy group Demos that has monitored the activity of Pilf and its allied groups for several years, said: “Their aim is not to ensure the security of our elections, but to intimidate people from going to the polls. They are promoting purges that prevent eligible voters from participating in our democracy.”

Naila Awan, a counsel at Demos — one of the legal firms representing the groups in the lawsuit — said Friday's ruling "sides with democracy and promotes a more robust and inclusive democracy. The state of Missouri has been failing to provide address update services required by the NVRA.

"This disproportionately impacts people of color and low-income individuals, who tend to move at higher rates."

Stuart Naifeh, one of the attorneys pressing the lawsuit against Reagan, said the ruling was deeply flawed, but the groups haven’t yet decided whether to file an appeal.

“Voters should go out there and check their registration to make sure they are update to date, since the secretary of state is not going to do anything about it,” Naifeh said.

[D]emos, another liberal think tank, sees things differently. Recent research by the group finds support for putting more of the emphasis on race. [...]


"Individuals who are still dealing with devastating losses from Hurricane Maria should not also have to contend with discrimination at the polls,” said Stuart Naifeh, senior counsel at Demos. “The court’s order protects the right of Spanish-speaking Puerto Rican citizens to meaningfully exercise their right to vote this fall.”

"Today's decision affirms what we have said in this case — that Puerto Rican citizens must be given full and equal access to the franchise. Individuals who are still dealing with devastating losses from Hurricane Maria should not also have to contend with discrimination at the polls," said Stuart Naifeh, senior counsel at Demos, one of several groups that filed the motion for the preliminary injunction.

| |

The White House also withheld over 100,000 pages of information linked to the judicial nominee. That, said Chiraag Bains, the director of legal strategies at the think-tank Demos, is “something that’s never happened before.” About 42,000 pages of White House documents were released just hours before the questioning started.

| |

[I]n Demos’ analysis of the case, the public policy organization focusing on issues of political equity, highlights that Kavanaugh, in joining this opinion, appears to question the idea of disparate impact, which maintains that a facially neutral policy can still have an adverse impact on a protected class. 

President Trump's nomination of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court could have broad implications for civil and human rights at home and abroad. From the use of wartime powers like torture, to the regulation of business, to gender and racial equity, the lives of many can be decided by the Supreme Court. Yesterday, Kavanaugh and the Senate Judiciary Committee gave opening statements amid protests from Democrats, who believe President Trump is deliberately withholding access to vital documents.