![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ny\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/book-binders-Elections-Institute-newsletters-e1717609709577.png\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
This week: Adams\u2019 Charter Revision Commission Rejected by State Court; U.S. Appeals Challenge Seeking NY Voter Lists; Election Disriptions Bil Awaits Action by Governor Hochul; Onondaga County Term Limits Fight Headed to Court; Around The Nation<\/p>\n
LITIGATION<\/p>\n
N.Y.C. Open Primaries Challenge Moves Ahead in State Courts<\/p>\n
Former Mayor Eric Adams appointed the so-called \u201czombie\u201d NYC Charter Revision Commission on his final day in office, with its main agenda item focused on creating open primaries for city elections. On May 27, Mayor Mamdani disbanded the Commission, using new authority included in the state budget.<\/p>\n
On Monday June 29, members of the Commission and Republican City Council Member Vickie Paladino, former Governor David Paterson, and Staten Island Borough President Vito Fossella, filed suit against the governor, mayor, the NYC Board of Elections, and the city clerk in Richmond County Supreme Court seeking to keep the commission alive.<\/p>\n
Simultaneously on June 30, the commission filed a petition for preclearance required by the state voting rights act, in New York County Supreme Court, to institute open primary local elections, which the Commission approved for placement on the November 2026 General Election ballot for NYC voters to decide.<\/p>\n
On July 16, after a hearing for the plaintiffs to show cause about the issues of a joint trial and disqualifying pro bono commission counsel Randy Mastro and Dechert LLP as counsel, the Manhattan Supreme Court ruled to<\/p>\n
1) not join the Richmond County case with the New York County case,<\/p>\n
2) not disqualify Mastro as counsel for the Commission, and 3) vacate the stay against any actions.<\/p>\n
As reported by PoliticoNY, the Manhattan Supreme Court \u201cpassed along the issue to the Staten Island Court.\u201d<\/p>\n
On Wednesday July 22, the Staten Island Supreme Court released their decision holding that<\/p>\n
1) Governor Hochul and the state legislature acted appropriately in giving Mayor Mamdani the power to disband the Commission,<\/p>\n
2) Paterson, Fossella, and Paladino do not have standing because they do not have a present injury that is distinct from the general public and their personal opinions have no bearing on their status as litigants, and<\/p>\n
3) there is no due process violation because the Commission met in donated space and legal services were pro bono, so there are no \u201cexpenses\u201d before the court.<\/p>\n
Also reported by PoliticoNY, the Staten Island Supreme Court found that Mayor Mamdani\u2019s action was reasonable because \u201cthe commission was formed with only hours remaining in [former Mayor] Adams\u2019 term,\u201d however, the court declined to disqualify Mastro as counsel for the Commission.<\/p>\n
The NYC Corporation Counsel is filing an appeal to the Manhattan Supreme Court\u2019s decision. The next hearing on the merits will be held today.<\/p>\n
Voter Rolls: United States v. New York State Board of Elections<\/p>\n
In June 2025, the U.S. Justice Department requested New York\u2019s compliance in turning over sensitive voter information, including dates of birth, partial Social Security numbers and driver\u2019s license numbers.<\/p>\n
On July 10, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York dismissed the DOJ\u2019s lawsuit finding that<\/p>\n
1) the DOJ stated no basis or purpose for ascertaining the voter rolls and lacked any relation to the purpose for the enactment of Title III of the Civil Rights Act, and<\/p>\n
2) Congress did not intend that statewide voter lists be public, but rather to disclose the process by which they maintain their voter lists.<\/p>\n
On July 23, the U.S. DOJ filed an appeal of the district court\u2019s decision to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.<\/p>\n
ELECTIONS<\/p>\n
Onondaga County Term Limits Fight Headed to Court<\/p>\n
The Onondaga County Legislature\u2019s clerk sent the county Board of Elections a local law that would place term limits for the county\u2019s executive and clerk of the legislature clerk of the Onondaga County Legislature on the ballot in November despite a veto signed by current County Executive Ryan McMahon.<\/p>\n
While Democratic elections commission Dustin Czarny was prepared for executing the law, Republican Commissioner Kevin Ryan disagreed. While the county executive meant to add a veto message to the legislative law, he did not get to submit it until after the original approved law was sent to the elections board.<\/p>\n
This leaves a disagreement among the two elections commissioners who will need to take separate legal measures to determine next steps.<\/p>\n
GOP Commissioner Ryan was quoted as saying that \u201cI\u2019m not going to agree this goes on the ballot absent a court order.\u201d<\/p>\n
The County Executive\u2019s office is blaming a technical clerical error for the incident and admits the mistake.<\/p>\n
According to Syracuse.com, \u201cSpeaking to reporters Thursday, McMahon put the blame on the county\u2019s top attorney, Robert Durr. He likened a bill-signing to a real estate closing: piles of papers to sign, one after another. He said his lawyer handed him the wrong document.<\/p>\n
\u201cYou have multiple hard copies normally when you\u2019re signing a local law or a veto,\u201d McMahon said. \u201cI came in, saw the veto, read the veto, signed it, asked my attorney if the other copies were vetoes. He said \u2018yes,\u2019 I signed it.\u201d<\/p>\n
Syracuse.com adds a comment from Democratic Commissioner Czarny: \u201cCzarny said that the county has assigned separate lawyers to him and Ryan, his Republican counterpart.<\/p>\n
\u201cHe said that he could bring a lawsuit against Ryan, or the county legislature could take the Board of Elections to court.<\/p>\n
\u201cI don\u2019t believe the Board of Elections should insert its own opinions into this,\u201d Czarny said. \u201cWe should follow the law as put forward and let the legislature and county exec fight it out in court.\u201d<\/p>\n
For more, go to Syracuse.com: https:\/\/bit.ly\/4vKAZdW<\/p>\n
REDISTRICTING<\/p>\n
Mid-decade Re\u00addis\u00adtricting Could Be Linked To A Chal\u00adlenging 2030 Census<\/p>\n
In Spectrum News\u2019 New York \u201cState of Politics,\u201d Susan Arbetter discusses the upcoming 2030 census and how it could impact New York\u2019s congressional delegation and the impetus to redraw congressional districts before the 2028 elections.<\/p>\n
Arbetter writes about Trump Administration efforts to change census residence rules, decennial census questions, a citizenship question, and how to categorize race and ethnicity. These changes could result in depressing New York\u2019 census count more than anticipated. Current projections estimate New York losing two congressional districts after 2030, but the loss could be greater. New York lost only one seat after 2030, two after 2000 and 2010, three after 1990 and a record number of five losses in 1980.<\/p>\n
She adds that \u201cexperts are also expecting to see a corresponding push by New York Democrats to find every possible seat using mid-decade redistricting, if a constitutional amendment allowing it is passed by voters.\u201d<\/p>\n
In an interview with New York Law School Professor Jeff Wice, she wrote that Wice thinks that \u201cthe midterm elections will determine how much of a driving force redistricting will be in New York state.\u201d<\/p>\n
Wice added that \u201cIn 2028, we need to see who controls the White House after Donald Trump leaves and would a new president bring the Census process back to the way it\u2019s been conducted in recent decades or will the next president be stuck with a completely challenging process, probably the hardest census to take in American history,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n
Read Arbetter\u2019s entire \u201cState of Politics\u201d column here: https:\/\/bit.ly\/4fsL0Xa<\/p>\n
In a separate article appearing in \u201cThe Beast,\u201d Josh Fiallo writes that \u201cit is \u201cwidely expected\u201d the Trump administration will \u201ctry to recategorize millions of immigrants (both unauthorized and legal) as not actually living here in the United States\u201d in the next Census.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cIf successful, that would mean a massive shift in the number of congressional representatives each state gets, how districts are drawn, how federal dollars are doled out, and how many votes each state has in the Electoral College process in presidential elections.\u201d<\/p>\n
Fiallo adds that this comes \u201cas a little-noticed \u201cstealth\u201d action by the administration that went unreported when a regulatory filing was issued in late June. Now, those familiar with the administration\u2019s alleged plans are frantically warning of what will come next.\u201dment is a god idea, while 44% think it\u2019s no<\/p>\n
LEGISLATION<\/p>\n
Election Disruptions Bill Awaits Action by Governor Hochul<\/p>\n
By: Joseph T. Burns and Claire Woynerowski<\/p>\n
Before ending their 2026 legislative session, the New York State Assembly and Senate approved bill A5846\/S4602, a proposal to establish remedies in the event of disruptions in voting during an election. The bill greatly expands the options available for disruptions in voting from what currently exists in the New York State Election Law.<\/p>\n
At present, the Election Law allows local and state boards of elections to schedule an additional day of voting in the event of a \u201cfire, earthquake, tornado, explosion, power failure, act of sabotage, enemy attack or other disaster\u201d and less than 25% of registered voters cast a ballot. Outside of those specifically designated events, poll site disruptions must be litigated, generally after the election has already passed.<\/p>\n
The bill passed by the legislature is intended to eliminate slow-moving judicial intervention where possible, requiring instead that state and local boards of elections extend voting hours proportionally by the amount of time of any voting disruption exceeding an hour. According to the sponsor\u2019s memo of the bill, its primary purpose is to provide a \u201crapid response solution to address natural or human-caused incidents that interrupt voting at poll sites.\u201d<\/p>\n
Considering that \u201cdisruption\u201d is defined in the proposed bill as \u201can obstruction or interruption at a polling place\u201d that causes voting to stop for more than an hour, the law would provide a remedy to a both vague and expansive category of interruptions.<\/p>\n
According to the sponsor\u2019s memo, the section of the Election Law that currently allows for voting extensions in the case of emergencies, Election Law \u00a7 3-108, only authorizes boards to remedy these disruptions by providing another day of voting, \u201cfailing to contemplate shorter disruptions that do not warrant an additional day but nonetheless suppress turnout.\u201d With the new law in place, boards would be required to extend the hours of voting at the end of the disrupted day or, if that is not feasible, extend the voting hours on another day. The law does stipulate that if the extensions to voting must take place on another day, they shall not be \u201clater than election day.\u201d In other words, though election officials would have discretion to extend voting hours on another day if there was a disruption during early voting, this bill could not be used to create additional days to vote after election day.<\/p>\n
The failure of polling officials to notify the boards of elections of a voting disruption exceeding one hour would also presume a violation of Election Law \u00a7 17-212, allowing remedies to injured parties in the form of \u201cadditional time to cast a ballot\u201d and by making the parties that failed to enforce this act liable for damages.<\/p>\n
The proposed legislation would also require that, in the case of extending voting hours due to a disruption, the board would have to notify voters by conspicuously publishing the details of the extension. The law states that the state and local boards of elections must notify \u201cthe bipartisan co-executive directors of the state board of elections; the civil rights bureau of the office of the attorney general; and any candidate or committee with candidates or questions appearing on a ballot to be voted upon in any such polling place impacted.\u201d Additionally, the bill requires that \u201cbest efforts\u201d be made to inform local media, and that boards of elections are authorized to contact and notify non-partisan civic organizations, including those serving primarily \u201clanguage-minority communities.\u201d<\/p>\n
Finally, this law would prevent any votes cast during these extended time periods from being segregated from other ballots or from being subject \u201cto challenge or judicial review on the basis that such ballots were untimely cast.\u201d<\/p>\n
Should it be signed by Governor Hochul, this bill would take effect immediately. It may, therefore, be in effect for the 2026 General Election if delivered to and signed by the Governor before Election Day.<\/p>\n
Joseph T. Burns is a partner in the Holtzman Vogel law firm\u2019s New York office. Claire Woynerowski is a summer legal intern. https:\/\/www.holtzmanvogel.com\/professionals\/joseph-t-burns<\/p>\n
AROUND THE NATION<\/p>\n
From The Redistrict Network (@RedistrictNet)<\/p>\n
NEW FEATURE! July 11: Daily District is a new project from Prof. Jonathan Cervas (CMU) and @Redistrictnet. Name all 435 U.S. House districts from their shape. Dropping imminently! \u2014 @RedistrictNet [from X]<\/p>\n
July 20: Gov. Mike Braun directed more than $750K to help defeat Republican state senators who defied President Donald Trump on congressional redistricting.<\/p>\n
Three Indiana U.S. House members and the new state commerce secretary also contributed. \u2014 @RedistrictNet [from X]<\/p>\n
July 20: The Maryland Senate President and Speaker of the House have informed colleagues that the August special session will only consider legislation on congressional redistricting. \u2014 @RedistrictNet [from X]<\/p>\n
July 21: U.S. Rep. Cleo Fields (D) will not seek re-election in Louisiana\u2019s 6th congressional district; instead he will run to fill the unexpired term for the state Senate in the 14th district.<\/p>\n
The move comes after the Louisiana legislature redrew the state\u2019s congressional map last month. \u2014 @RedistrictNet [from X]<\/p>\n
July 23: Federal court REFUSES to block Tennessee\u2019s new congressional map that carves Memphis into 3 districts and erases the state\u2019s only majority-Black seat. Judges say politics \u2014 not race \u2014 explains the map. Preliminary injunction DENIED. \u2014 @RedistrictNet [from X]<\/p>\n
July 25: Mississippi House Speaker Jason White has named his appointees to the Standing Joint Committee on Reapportionment and Redistricting, a first step toward redrawing the state\u2019s legislative and congressional maps. \u2014 @RedistrictNet [from X]<\/p>\n
INSTITUTE RESOURCES<\/p>\n
The New York Elections, Census and Redistricting Institute has archived many resources for the public to view on our Digital Commons Page.<\/p>\n
Our Redistricting Resources page contains resources on the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Act. You can access the page here: https:\/\/digitalcommons.nyls.edu\/redistricting_resources\/<\/p>\n
Archived Updates can be accessed here: https:\/\/digitalcommons.nyls.edu\/redistricting_roundtable_updates\/<\/p>\n