vox--2020-09-24--No police officers charged with killing Breonna Taylor

After a months-long investigation into the police shooting of Breonna Taylor , a Jefferson County grand jury announced on September 23 that it would indict a former officer in the shooting that killed the 26-year-old EMT .
No one was directly charged in her death .
Former Louisville Metro police officer Brett Hankison was indicted on three counts of first-degree wanton endangerment for threatening the lives of Taylor ’ s neighbors when he fired bullets that went through Taylor ’ s apartment into theirs .
The two other officers who fired shots into the apartment that night — Sgt .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ were not indicted .
“ The decision before my office as the special prosecutor in this case was not to decide if the loss of Ms. Taylor ’ s life was a tragedy .
The answer to that question is , unequivocally , yes , ” Kentucky Attorney General Daniel Cameron said at a press conference after the announcement in Louisville , where protesters gathered in the streets after the grand jury decision many deemed inadequate .
“ My job as a special prosecutor in this case was to put emotions aside and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ violations of state law resulted in the loss of Ms. Taylor ’ s life , ” Cameron said .
Benjamin Crump , one of the attorneys representing Taylor ’ s family , called the grand jury decision “ outrageous ” and “ offensive.
” “ If Brett Hankison ’ s behavior was wanton endangerment to people in neighboring apartments , then it should have been wanton endangerment in Breonna Taylor ’ s apartment too .
In fact , it should have been ruled wanton murder !
” he tweeted .
The nation has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ investigation all summer .
Cameron said he presented to the grand jury on Monday , and the jury made its decision by noon on Wednesday .
The announcement came nearly 200 days after Taylor was shot dead by police while she was asleep in her apartment on March 13 .
As news of the incident drew attention in early May and picked up steam after the police killing of George Floyd later that month , protests broke out across the country .
Over time , the phrase “ Arrest the cops who killed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for activists — as well as the focal point of countless memes .
The phrase was plastered on T-shirts worn by athletes at sporting events and big-name actors at the Emmys .
Many pointed out that Black women killed by police don ’ t often receive as much attention , or justice , in matters of police violence , and now was the time to correct that .
Ahead of the announcement , Louisville Mayor Greg Fischer instituted a 72-hour curfew beginning Wednesday at 9 pm , while Louisville Metro Police Department Chief @ @ @ @ @ @ @ emergency for the police force on Tuesday in anticipation of protests and riots .
The police also restricted access to downtown Louisville beginning on Tuesday , according to the Courier-Journal , and the Kentucky National Guard was activated on Wednesday afternoon .
Two police officers were shot and injured during the protests and a suspect was taken into custody , according to Robert J. Schroeder , the Louisville police chief .
Organizers and activists , including Until Freedom ’ s Tamika Mallory , gathered in the street alongside protesters Wednesday afternoon .
Mallory @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and non-peaceful .
Some protesters cried in one another ’ s arms as others shouted , “ No justice !
No peace !
Say her name !
Breonna Taylor !
” and waved Black Lives Matter flags .
In the days leading up to Cameron ’ s announcement , Taylor ’ s mother , Tamika L. Palmer , called on the attorney general to charge all of the officers involved in the shooting .
“ It ’ s crunch time , and we ’ re putting our faith and trust in you , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ directed at Cameron .
“ Do you have the power and courage to call my child yours , the power to see that my cry and my community ’ s cry is heard , and the power as part of a village who raises our children to do right by one of our daughters ?
!
” Wanton endangerment in the first degree is a class-D felony in the state of Kentucky .
If convicted , Hankison could face up to five years in prison for each count .
Hankison could , conversely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and complete probation and community service .
Kentucky law defines wanton endangerment in the first degree as : While there are six charges of homicide under Kentucky law , Cameron said his office did not pursue them because officers Cosgrove and Mattingly were justified in firing their weapons since Kenneth Walker , Taylor ’ s boyfriend , shot at them that night .
“ Use of force by Mattingly and Cosgrove was justified to protect themselves .
This justification bars us from pursuing criminal charges , ” Cameron said .
Moreover , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the fact that he fired his weapon and his bullets traveled through Taylor ’ s apartment to the neighboring residence where three civilians were at the time , according to the special investigation .
During the course of the investigation , the Louisville Metro Police Department terminated Hankison because it found he “ displayed an extreme indifference to the value of human life ” when he “ wantonly and blindly ” fired 10 rounds into Taylor ’ s apartment , according to his termination letter .
The reason for Hankison ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ grand jury .
Mattingly and Cosgrove were placed on administrative reassignment in May .
On Tuesday , in anticipation of the grand jury ’ s decision , Mattingly wrote an email to about 1,000 law enforcement colleagues stating , “ Regardless of the outcome today or Wednesday , I know we did the legal , moral , and ethical thing that night.
” Mattingly called protesters “ thugs ” and slammed police department leaders and FBI “ who aren ’ t cops and would piss their pants if they had to hold the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ civil rights violations .
The grand jury announcement reveals a new version of what happened during the early hours of March 13 Cameron ’ s version of events of the raid on March 13 both differs from and fills in the gaps of the story that has been pieced together in news reports over months .
On the night Taylor was killed , police relied on a no-knock warrant to enter her apartment in search of two people suspected of selling drugs , neither of whom was Taylor .
While police say they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Kenneth Walker , who was inside the apartment at the time , disputes that claim .
On Wednesday , Cameron announced developments on this particular detail .
According to the attorney general , there was an independent witness ( a civilian ) near Taylor ’ s apartment who said that officers knocked and announced themselves .
“ The warrant was not served as a no-knock warrant , ” Cameron said .
When no one answered the door , officers breached it .
The first officer to enter was Mattingly , who , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ two individuals standing beside one another — a male and a female — with the male holding a gun with his arms extended in a shooting stance .
“ Sergeant Mattingly saw the man ’ s gun fire , heard a boom , and immediately knew he was shot as a result of feeling heat in his upper thigh , ” Cameron said .
According to the ballistics report , Mattingly was shot once by a 9 mm handgun , the gun that belonged to Kenneth Walker , Taylor ’ s boyfriend .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ hallway .
Meanwhile , Detective Cosgrove shot 16 times , all in a matter of seconds .
In total , six bullets hit Taylor , Cameron revealed , with a ballistics report from the FBI concluding that Detective Cosgrove fired the fatal shot ; her death certificate had noted she was shot five times .
Taylor ’ s lawyer said she was struck a total of eight times .
Determining who fired the fatal shot was integral to the investigation and extended the length of it , Cameron said .
But since Cosgrove @ @ @ @ @ @ @ since they were fired upon by Walker , he would not be charged .
Detective Hankison , meanwhile , fired 10 shots from outside the apartment , with some bullets going through the bedroom window , through Taylor ’ s apartment and into the neighboring one .
At the time , three residents of that apartment were at home , including a man , a pregnant woman , and a child .
“ There is no conclusive evidence that any bullets fired from Detective Hankison ’ s weapons struck Ms. Taylor , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of investigators reconstructed the events that took place that night by reviewing ballistics evidence , 911 calls , police radio traffic , and interviews .
Video footage — Cameron did not say from where — began at the point when area patrol officers arrived at the location .
They also used information from the Kentucky State Police local medical examiner ’ s lab and the FBI crime lab in Quantico .
What happens next in the fight for justice in Louisville A week ago , the city of Louisville announced that it had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Taylor ’ s family and attorneys — the largest sum the city has ever paid out for a police misconduct suit .
The settlement was in response to a lawsuit that Taylor ’ s family filed in April , alleging excessive force and gross negligence on the part of the officers .
A court filing submitted by the family in July alleged that Taylor did not receive emergency medical aid after she was shot and that the drug raid on her apartment was part of a government-backed development scheme to clear out a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ While the settlement included a list of police reforms , Mayor Fischer said it was not an acknowledgment of wrongdoing on the city ’ s part .
On Tuesday , Cameron acknowledged that many would not be satisfied with the grand jury ’ s decision but fervently urged the country to accept “ the truth ” and for elected officials to do whatever it takes to “ maintain law and order ” : Cameron also announced that he would create a task force of citizens , law enforcement officials , and elected officials @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for securing , reviewing , and executing search warrants .
“ I believe conducting a top-to-bottom review of the search warrant process is necessary to determine if changes are required and establish best practices , ” Cameron said .
He added that his office would vigorously prosecute the criminal charges announced on Wednesday .
Cameron was assigned the case as special prosecutor in May and in the past five months revealed few details about the independent investigation .
Meanwhile , activists have pressed lawmakers to defund the local police department .
While Louisville @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in June to ban no-knock warrants , it also approved a budget that wouldn ’ t even begin to defund LMPD .
The new spending plan will merely “ require police to put the money toward recruiting a more diverse force , additional training and exploring co-responder models that could send behavioral health professionals on calls with officers , ” according to the Courier-Journal .
The FBI is still investigating Taylor ’ s killing for possible civil rights violations .
Help keep Vox free for all Millions turn to Vox each month to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ news , from the coronavirus crisis to a racial reckoning to what is , quite possibly , the most consequential presidential election of our lifetimes .
Our mission has never been more vital than it is in this moment : to empower you through understanding .
But our distinctive brand of explanatory journalism takes resources .
Even when the economy and the news advertising market recovers , your support will be a critical part of sustaining our resource-intensive work .
If you have already contributed , thank you .
If you haven ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sense of an increasingly chaotic world : Contribute today from as little as $ 3 .

The Kentucky attorney general’s office released about 20 hours of audio recordings from the Breonna Taylor grand jury on Friday, after being ordered by a judge to do so.
The highly anticipated audio files capture the full case that AG Daniel Cameron presented to the grand jury from September 21 to 23, including which witnesses they heard and the team’s presentation that led to the indictment of former Louisville Metro Police Department officer Brett Hankison.
On September 23, Hankison was indicted on three counts of first-degree wanton endangerment for threatening the lives of Taylor’s neighbors when he fired bullets that went through Taylor’s apartment into theirs. The two other officers who fired shots into the apartment that night hitting Taylor — Sgt. Jonathan Mattingly and detective Myles Cosgrove — were not indicted.
Rallying cries across the nation turned from “arrest the cops” to “release the transcripts” of the grand jury proceedings shortly after the decision was announced, as many wondered why no officers were charged with actually killing Taylor and what the attorney general’s office specifically presented to the jury.
On Monday, a juror filed a motion criticizing Cameron’s public characterization of the case and demanding the release of the transcripts. According to the unidentified juror, Cameron did not give the panel the opportunity to indict the two officers who shot Taylor. In the motion, the juror said their request to have the recordings released is an effort to share “only the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.”
Cameron’s office confirmed on Monday that the only charge he recommended to the grand jury was wanton endangerment, not any of the six felony homicide charges under Kentucky law, according to the Washington Post. Cameron had previously declined to say what charges he presented to the grand jury.
At a Louisville press conference last Friday, Taylor’s family and their attorneys gathered to express their dissatisfaction with the grand jury’s decision and questioned what Cameron presented. “Did he present any evidence on Breonna Taylor’s behalf? Or did he make a unilateral decision to put his thumb on the scales of justice?” attorney Benjamin Crump asked.
The nation had been awaiting the decision in the criminal investigation all summer. Cameron said he presented his findings to the grand jury beginning on Monday, September 21, and the jury made its decision by noon on Wednesday, September 23. The announcement came nearly 200 days after Taylor was shot dead by police while she was asleep in her apartment on March 13. As news of the incident drew attention in early May and picked up steam after the police killing of George Floyd later that month, protests broke out across the country.
Over time, the phrase “Arrest the cops who killed Breonna Taylor” became a rallying cry for activists — as well as the focal point of countless memes. The phrase was plastered on T-shirts worn by athletes at sporting events and big-name actors at the Emmys. Many pointed out that Black women killed by police don’t often receive much attention, or justice, in matters of police violence, and now was the time to correct that.
The tapes might answer a number of questions that activists and the Taylor family’s attorneys have raised, like which witnesses Cameron’s office allowed to testify and whether the office presented pieces of evidence — sending the ambulance away before the raid, the many witnesses who have said they did not hear the police knock and announce themselves — that reportedly show the police violated protocol. As the tapes are parsed, the coming days may reveal new insight in the decision.
What is wanton endangerment?
The grand jury decision caused outcry across the nation over what many see as a weak indictment charge. Hankison was charged not with killing Taylor, but with endangering her neighbors.
Wanton endangerment in the first degree is a class D felony in the state of Kentucky. If convicted, Hankison could face up to five years in prison for each count. He could, alternatively, be required to pay fines and complete probation and community service.
Kentucky law defines wanton endangerment in the first degree as:
A person is guilty of wanton endangerment in the first degree when, under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to the value of human life, he wantonly engages in conduct which creates a substantial danger of death or serious physical injury to another person.
While there are six charges of homicide under Kentucky law, Cameron said his office did not pursue them because officers Cosgrove and Mattingly were justified in firing their weapons since Kenneth Walker, Taylor’s boyfriend, shot at them that night. “Use of force by Mattingly and Cosgrove was justified to protect themselves. This justification bars us from pursuing criminal charges,” Cameron said.
Hankison, meanwhile, was only charged in connection to the fact that he fired his weapon and his bullets traveled through Taylor’s apartment to a neighboring residence where three civilians were at the time, according to the special investigation.
During the course of the investigation, the Louisville Metro Police Department terminated Hankison because it found he “displayed an extreme indifference to the value of human life” when he “wantonly and blindly” fired 10 rounds into Taylor’s apartment, according to his termination letter. The reason for Hankison’s termination essentially mirrors the decision of the grand jury. Mattingly and Cosgrove were placed on administrative reassignment in May.
The grand jury announcement revealed a new version of what happened during the early hours of March 13
Cameron’s version of events of the raid on March 13 both differs from and fills in the gaps of the story that has been pieced together in news reports over months.
On the night Taylor was killed, police relied on a no-knock warrant to enter her apartment in search of two people suspected of selling drugs, neither of whom was Taylor. While police say they announced themselves, Walker, Taylor’s boyfriend, who was inside the apartment at the time, disputes that claim.
In his grand jury announcement on September 23, Cameron announced developments on this particular detail. According to the attorney general, there was an independent witness (a civilian) near Taylor’s apartment who said that officers knocked and announced themselves. “The warrant was not served as a no-knock warrant,” Cameron said.
When no one answered the door, officers breached it. The first officer to enter was Mattingly, who, in a statement, said he identified two individuals standing beside one another — Walker and Taylor — with the man holding a gun with his arms extended in a shooting stance. “Sergeant Mattingly saw the man’s gun fire, heard a boom, and immediately knew he was shot as a result of feeling heat in his upper thigh,” Cameron said.
According to the ballistics report, Mattingly was shot once by a 9 mm handgun, the gun that belonged to Walker. Mattingly fired six shots back down the hallway. Meanwhile, Detective Cosgrove shot 16 times, all in a matter of seconds.
In total, six bullets hit Taylor, Cameron revealed (her death certificate had noted she was shot five times, and Taylor’s lawyer had previously said she was struck a total of eight times), with a ballistics report from the FBI concluding Cosgrove fired the fatal shot. Determining who fired the fatal shot was integral to the investigation and extended the length of it, Cameron said. But since Cosgrove was justified in his use of force because they were fired upon by Walker, Cameron said, he would not be charged.
Hankison, meanwhile, fired 10 shots from outside the apartment, with some bullets going through the bedroom window, through Taylor’s apartment and into the neighboring one. At the time, three residents of that apartment were at home, including a man, a pregnant woman, and a child. “There is no conclusive evidence that any bullets fired from Detective Hankison’s weapons struck Ms. Taylor,” Cameron said.
Cameron said his team of investigators reconstructed the events that took place that night by reviewing ballistics evidence, 911 calls, police radio traffic, and interviews. Video footage — Cameron did not say from where — began at the point when area patrol officers arrived at the location. They also used information from the Kentucky State Police local medical examiner’s lab and the FBI crime lab in Quantico.
At the September 25 press conference, the family’s attorney, Crump, cast doubt on Cameron’s investigation and demanded that the attorney general release the transcripts of the case he presented before the grand jury. Crump alleged that Cameron may have left out key details and witnesses in his presentation.
“Did he tell them about the 12 neighbors ... that live in close proximity of Breonna’s apartment that all said they did not hear the police knock and announce their presence — did he let him testify before the grand jury?” Crump said. “Did he let the cops who shot over 30 rounds of bullets in Breonna’s apartment ... testify before the grand jury? Did he allow Breonna’s boyfriend, Kenny Walker, to testify before the grand jury?”
He also raised concerns about policy lapses around the no-knock warrant, saying, “If he didn’t present these things to the grand jury, what kind of sham grand jury proceeding was this?”
Crump said the lack of transparency follows a pattern of “blatant disrespect and marginalization of Black people,” but especially Black women who have been killed by police.
At the press conference, attorney Lonita Baker also demanded that Cameron tell the public whether he recommended charges to the grand jury.
“I don’t want to hear that the grand jury determined this, if it’s your office that unilaterally determined not to charge any officers with the death of Breanna Taylor,” Baker said. “You can’t pawn this on the grand jury if your office made that decision. We the voters deserve to know who is it that we need to say got it wrong.”
Now that Cameron has confirmed he recommended the wanton endangerment charge for Hankison, this new information sheds light on some of the constraints the grand jury faced. As the jurors wrote in their motion, “Using the grand jurors as a shield to deflect accountability and responsibility for these decisions only sows more seeds of doubt in the process while leaving a cold chill down the spines of future grand jurors.”
As Anna North reports, many others wonder if the attorney general, a protégé of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell who spoke glowingly of President Trump at the Republican National Convention, truly did his best as a prosecutor to secure indictments in the Taylor case. (Cameron’s office has not responded to Vox’s request for comment.)
“There are questions as to whether he really did the job he could’ve done,” Dewey Clayton, a political science professor at the University of Louisville, told North.
Amy McGrath, who is running for McConnell’s Kentucky Senate seat, had also called on Cameron to be more transparent. “AG Cameron needs to release the grand jury report now, including what evidence and recommendations he chose to present,” McGrath tweeted on September 24. “We shouldn’t have to take his word for it.”
What happens next in the fight for justice in Louisville
In the wake of the grand jury announcement, protests erupted in Chicago, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, New York, Seattle, Washington, DC, and Portland on September 23. In Louisville, where the decision was delivered, protesters didn’t let barricades, a curfew, the presence of police officers in riot gear, or the presence of the National Guard deter them from pouring out into the streets to say Breonna Taylor’s name. People marched around downtown declaring that the city and law enforcement officials had failed them.
By early the next morning, police had arrested 127 people in Louisville, according to the Courier-Journal, and one suspect was taken into custody in connection with the shooting of two city police officers, who sustained non-life-threatening injuries, according to interim Louisville Metro Police Chief Robert Schroeder.
Later that night, protests continued throughout the country. In Louisville, at least two dozen more were arrested, according to the Courier-Journal. Among those arrested were Kentucky state Rep. Attica Scott, who led the local effort to ban no-knock warrants, and activist Shameka Parrish-Wright of Louisville’s Bail Project. At First Unitarian Church, hundreds of protesters sought sanctuary to avoid being arrested for violating the city’s 9 pm curfew.
In Los Angeles, protesters took to the streets and police detained a man for reportedly driving his vehicle through a crowd of protesters. In Portland, after police declared the local Breonna Taylor protest a riot and used OC gas (similar to pepper spray) to disperse crowds the previous night, protesters returned. The same happened in Seattle, where an officer was captured on video rolling a bike over a protester’s head the night prior (the officer has since been placed on administrative leave). Protests also continued in Rochester, Baltimore, Kansas City, Las Vegas, and Philadelphia and in other cities throughout the week and into the weekend.
On September 15, the city of Louisville announced it had reached a $12 million settlement with Taylor’s family and attorneys — the largest sum the city has ever paid out for a police misconduct suit. The settlement was in response to a lawsuit Taylor’s family filed in April, alleging excessive force and gross negligence on the part of the officers. A court filing submitted by the family in July alleged that Taylor did not receive emergency medical aid after she was shot, and that the drug raid on her apartment was part of a government-backed development scheme to clear out a block in Taylor’s neighborhood.
While the settlement included a list of police reforms, Louisville Mayor Greg Fischer said it was not an acknowledgment of wrongdoing on the city’s part. Cameron also announced he would create a task force of citizens, law enforcement officials, and elected officials to review the state’s process for securing, reviewing, and executing search warrants.
He also acknowledged that many would not be satisfied with the grand jury’s decision but fervently urged the country to accept “the truth.” But with the recordings of the sessions set to be released this week, the public may get a fuller picture of the truth. According to critics, the truth requires that Cameron be more transparent with his process and accountable to the public.
Cameron was assigned the case as special prosecutor in May and in the past five months revealed few details about the independent investigation. Meanwhile, activists have pressed lawmakers to defund the local police department. While Louisville’s Metro Council did vote unanimously in June to ban no-knock warrants, it also approved a budget that wouldn’t even begin to defund LMPD. The new spending plan will merely “require police to put the money toward recruiting a more diverse force, additional training and exploring co-responder models that could send behavioral health professionals on calls with officers,” according to the Courier-Journal.
The FBI is still investigating Taylor’s killing for possible civil rights violations.


vox--2020-09-24--How to fix our broken democracy

How to fix our broken democracy

It ’ s too damn hard for too many people to vote in the United States , and that ’ s no accident .
Voters in predominantly Black and brown neighborhoods often have to wait hours in line to cast a ballot .
Lawful voters can be purged from the voting rolls without adequate warning .
States enact laws that serve no purpose other than to make it harder to vote — and they often do so with the blessing of the Supreme Court .
Help , however , is potentially on the way .
In the first episode of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ podcast miniseries that I ’ m hosting , I spoke with voting rights lawyer Janai Nelson about a pair of ambitious bills that could pass Congress very quickly if Democrats take back the White House and the Senate in November .
These bills offer solutions to a wide range of problems facing American democracy , including gerrymandering , voter purges , and other intentionally efforts to prevent American citizens from casting a ballot .
Nelson , who is associate director-counsel of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund , also walked me through @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that their votes are counted in 2020 .
An edited transcript of our conversation follows .
The full conversation can be heard on By the People .
By the People ?
is a special podcast miniseries associated with Vox ’ s podcast The Weeds .
You can listen to future episodes of By the People ?
by subscribing to The Weeds wherever you listen to podcasts , including Apple Podcasts , Google Podcasts , Spotify , and Stitcher .
So I want to start with a fairly optimistic future .
Imagine that it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ different president and we have a Congress that is really itching to pass a really strong voting rights bill .
What should be in that new bill ?
The good thing is we don ’ t really have to invent a bill out of whole cloth .
There are two comprehensive and transformative bills that have already been passed by the House and provide a really excellent starting point to build a new and improved democracy .
Those two bills are the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act , also known as HR @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Act , known as HR 1 .
Yeah , let ’ s drill down a bit into them .
So , one perennial problem we see is that a state will pass something , a law that ’ s already unconstitutional .
Maybe it ’ s a racial gerrymander , maybe it ’ s just a way of disenfranchising people — but it could take the courts years to strike that law down .
And in those years , the state ’ s running elections under this law that shouldn ’ t exist @ @ @ @ @ @ @ happening ?
How do you prevent lawmakers from enacting a law and running several elections under that law , and then maybe enacting something slightly different when the courts get around to striking it down ?
Yeah , we have seen that happen time and again .
Probably one of the most vexing problems for voting rights advocates is the idea that an election can take place under a law that is later found to be discriminatory .
The great thing is that the VRAA , the Voting Rights Advancement Act , which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ legendary civil rights hero John Lewis , contains a “ preclearance ” provision that restores the powerful tool that was in the Voting Rights Act before the Supreme Court disabled it in 2013 .
So states like Georgia and Texas and Alabama and Louisiana and many others would have to seek federal approval before they make a voting change .
And that ’ s critical to prevent elections from occurring under laws that should never have been in place in the first place , and that serve to disenfranchise communities and largely Black @ @ @ @ @ @ @ really old enough to pay attention to was the 2000 election and specifically the 2000 election in Florida .
I mean , it was a nightmare .
And one of the things that made it a nightmare is that there was this purge list of voters who were kicked off of the voter rolls .
We don ’ t know how many people were purged who shouldn ’ t have been purged .
But Bush ’ s margin of victory was about 500 votes .
So there ’ s a decent likelihood that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not for this purge list .
Why is voter registration still a thing that can be used to disenfranchise people ?
Why is it the case that your right to vote still depends on your name appearing on this registration list ?
And what does the legislation Congress is considering do to deal with that problem ?
The 2000 election was the election that really was pivotal for me as well .
In fact , it was the very first voting rights case that I ever litigated — to protect Black and Haitian @ @ @ @ @ @ @ disenfranchised , some because of the very practice that you mentioned , the voter purge .
So let ’ s just start with voter purging and then go back to voter registration issues in the 2000 election .
There ’ s something called list maintenance , right ?
And it ’ s something that we want to see happen in our states where election officials ensure that the people who are registered to vote are still alive , that they still live in the appropriate jurisdiction , and that they meet all the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ And that ’ s something that ’ s perfectly legitimate and fair .
The problem is that many election officials use what should be an innocuous process of just cleaning up the voter rolls to purge people intentionally from the rolls , to actively remove people from the rolls and to target particular groups that they don ’ t want to vote .
We saw that in the 2000 election where at the time [ Florida ’ s ] governor instituted a purge process that targeted people with felony convictions .
If you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ community that has a disproportionate number of people with felony convictions , in that case the African American community , also the Latinx community , then you stand a greater likelihood of being kicked off of the rolls as part of that sweep .
Not only if you happen to have a felony conviction , but even if you don ’ t .
You may share a name with someone who has a felony conviction .
You may be misidentified as someone who has a felony conviction .
Now , if we look @ @ @ @ @ @ @ why do we need to affirmatively have citizens of this country bear such a disproportionate burden and onus to register ?
In my mind , it ’ s such an antiquated process .
We ’ re one of the few democracies that places such a burden on voters to participate in our democracy .
What a growing number of states is doing now is allowing automatic voter registration .
So when you turn 18 and you ’ re a citizen of this country , you can automatically be added to the voter rolls @ @ @ @ @ @ @ different ways .
Oregon was the first state to do it in 2015 .
But since then we have 18 states [ and the District of Columbia ] that have some form of automatic voter registration , which has increased the voting rolls in many of those states .
And there are estimates that suggest that in the first year alone , if we had national automatic voter registration , we might be able to add something like 22-27 million new voters to our voter registration rolls , which could be transformative , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ new younger voters into the electorate .
And many of them happen to be people of color where we have the largest growing demographic of young people in this country .
Gotcha .
And if HR 1 passes , would it require states to have some form of automatic registration ?
It also includes what is all-important , early voting , two weeks of early voting in every state , which takes the burden off of our election system on a single day , which still exists in some states .
It also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , which again eases the burden on individuals to participate in our democracy by making it a holiday and giving them the time that they need in order to cast their ballots .
And finally , the For the People Act also places some limitations on voter purges , which , again , for the reasons we discussed , is quite important .
So let me switch to a different problem : gerrymandering .
Gerrymandering is , I think , a bipartisan problem .
But because Republicans happened to have a very good @ @ @ @ @ @ @ year before the new maps were drawn , they got to do an oversized amount of gerrymandering .
And so we ’ ve seen that in the elections we ’ ve had for the last 10 years .
What can be done ?
And what specifically is Congress considering right now to deal with this problem of gerrymandering ?
Well , it takes us right back to the For the People Act , HR 1 , which also deals with partisan gerrymandering .
It institutes nonpartisan commissions to draw electoral districts .
And @ @ @ @ @ @ @ already using either bipartisan or nonpartisan commissions to play some role in the redistricting process , which helps to reduce the partisan overreach that occurs , as you noted , from both parties , but has been exacerbated and just exponential in the hands of the Republican Party in recent years .
There ’ s something that Stacey Abrams , the former Georgia gubernatorial candidate , said that stuck with me , which is that a lot of these laws that are being enacted by state legislatures and upheld by the courts are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ user error.
” It ’ s not that you were denied the right to vote — it ’ s that you didn ’ t bring the right ID .
It ’ s not that you were denied the right to vote — it ’ s that you didn ’ t sign your ballot in the right place .
What we see going on now , I think , is different than what happened in Mississippi in the 1950s in that it ’ s not a wholesale , “ Well , I look @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you can ’ t vote.
” It ’ s an attempt to make it look like it is the voter ’ s fault .
I guess given that framework , does that mean that voters have more control ?
Can they take matters into their own hands and make sure that they don ’ t get trapped by those sorts of things ?
Voters in this country bear such a significant burden in ensuring that they have an opportunity to participate in our democracy .
That said , the reality is , in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to vote .
There [ are measures ] that voters can take to do everything within their power to make sure that they are checking their registrations , that their registration is up to date , that they notify election officials if they move , that they know when early voting starts , that they know how they can cast a mail-in ballot .
All of that is information that is readily available to voters if they seek it .
It ’ s unfortunate that they have to seek it .
There should @ @ @ @ @ @ @ possible entry point into our electoral system from state officials .
But to the extent that that ’ s not happening , we ’ re asking that all voters do whatever it takes to ensure that they can cast a ballot this November .
In the 1980s , the RNC had a scheme where they recruited a bunch of off duty police officers and I believe gave them armbands identifying them as election security with the apparent intent of intimidating Black and brown voters against voting .
And for many years , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , “ Don ’ t do that.
” The court order has now been dissolved .
And this will be the first presidential election without that court order in place .
So how worried are you about voter intimidation ?
And what steps can be taken right now to make sure that voters aren ’ t scared out of casting their vote ?
Voter intimidation is as old as this democracy .
And the intimidation of Black voters in particular is as old as the 15th Amendment , granting black men the right @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pointed out , there has been something of a control on voter intimidation since the 1980s where you mentioned the off-duty police officers who not only were wearing blue armbands , but they were also armed with service revolvers and they swarmed precincts , many of which were in Black and brown communities in New Jersey and other neighborhoods like that to intimidate them and to deter them from casting their constitutional right to vote .
It took a lawsuit to disband this so-called National Ballot Security Task Force .
And what ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not so coincidentally now that that consent decree has expired — Trump stated very recently that we are going to have sheriffs , law enforcement , US attorneys , and attorneys general at the polls .
That in and of itself is voter intimidation .
To suggest that you have to navigate law enforcement and people who could prosecute you in order to cast a ballot is intimidation on its face .
And just recently , Michigan voters received robocalls misinforming them that voting by mail might expose their personal information to creditors @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the CDC for purposes of a forced vaccination .
It ’ s that type of misinformation that groups like the Legal Defense Fund are combating by telling voters to be discerning , that if they have a question about a voting rule or law or barrier that they hear about , that they check it with a trusted source .
Which is why we are part of an election protection network and force that will have people on the ground on Election Day , that will have people available by phone at 866-OUR-VOTE @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and to hopefully get relief , and to go to the court , if necessary , to prevent any further intimidation from happening from the polls .
So that number that you just said .
866-OUR-VOTE .
If I receive a call telling me if I vote , then there ’ ll be some terrible consequence , that ’ s the number that I can call to get credible advice on whether I actually need to worry .
That ’ s right .
You can get credible advice on whether that is a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also very helpful for us to be able to track what intimidation tactics are being used .
And there are many places to go for information if you want to know your polling site , if you know your registration status , there are all sorts of government , as well as civil rights funded sites that can give you that information Can you name a few of those sites ?
All voters can go to usa.gov/confirm-voter-registration to check and see if they ’ re registered to vote .
And you can just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ re located and your name and find out immediately if you are registered to vote .
And the Legal Defense Fund recently launched a microsite that is devoted to voting and voting rights information .
It ’ s a one-stop shop for everything you might want to know about voting rights , including census and redistricting , which is all tied in to this intricate election system that we have .
And that voting site is voting.naacpldf.org .
And that ’ s a good reminder that anyone listening who hasn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do that .
Yes , that is critical .
Be counted .
So : What is your plan to make sure that your vote is counted ?
Well , I ’ m proud to say that I ’ ve already requested my absentee ballot here in my home state of New York .
Early voting here begins October 24 and it ends November 1 .
And I intend to physically turn in my ballot at a precinct during that early voting period to ensure that it is received and counted .
And frankly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that we have for anyone who plans to vote by mail , that you request your ballot early , if your state requires that you request and not receive it without any demand , and that you physically turn it in to a designated local election drop off or precinct that will take your ballot .
Of course , if you are planning to vote in person , you know , gear up that day and be prepared to face whatever obstacles may come up , including long lines and other issues , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in your state .
And everyone should be reaching out to their networks to make sure that everyone they know is also equally prepared to vote .
And finally , one of the things that the Legal Defense Fund is working on with the More Than A Vote organization that was started by LeBron James is a poll worker recruitment drive .
If you have the ability to serve as a poll worker in this upcoming election , please do so .
We are facing a shortage of poll workers .
You can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ find out more about how to become a poll worker in your jurisdiction to help ensure that everyone can cast an equal ballot and receives the assistance that they need in this election .
Will you help keep Vox free for all ?
The United States is in the middle of one of the most consequential presidential elections of our lifetimes .
It ’ s essential that all Americans are able to access clear , concise information on what the outcome of the election could mean for their lives , and the lives @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is our mission at Vox .
But our distinctive brand of explanatory journalism takes resources .
Even when the economy and the news advertising market recovers , your support will be a critical part of sustaining our resource-intensive work .
If you have already contributed , thank you .
If you haven ’ t , please consider helping everyone understand this presidential election : Contribute today from as little as $ 3 .

It’s too damn hard for too many people to vote in the United States, and that’s no accident.
Voters in predominantly Black and brown neighborhoods often have to wait hours in line to cast a ballot. Lawful voters can be purged from the voting rolls without adequate warning. States enact laws that serve no purpose other than to make it harder to vote — and they often do so with the blessing of the Supreme Court.
Help, however, is potentially on the way. In the first episode of By the People?, a new podcast miniseries that I’m hosting, I spoke with voting rights lawyer Janai Nelson about a pair of ambitious bills that could pass Congress very quickly if Democrats take back the White House and the Senate in November.
These bills offer solutions to a wide range of problems facing American democracy, including gerrymandering, voter purges, and other intentionally efforts to prevent American citizens from casting a ballot.
Nelson, who is associate director-counsel of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, also walked me through several steps that Americans can take so that their votes are counted in 2020.
An edited transcript of our conversation follows. The full conversation can be heard on By the People.
By the People? is a special podcast miniseries associated with Vox’s podcast The Weeds. You can listen to future episodes of By the People? by subscribing to The Weeds wherever you listen to podcasts, including Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, Spotify, and Stitcher.
Ian Millhiser
So I want to start with a fairly optimistic future. Imagine that it’s January. We have a different president and we have a Congress that is really itching to pass a really strong voting rights bill.
What should be in that new bill?
Janai Nelson
The good thing is we don’t really have to invent a bill out of whole cloth. There are two comprehensive and transformative bills that have already been passed by the House and provide a really excellent starting point to build a new and improved democracy. Those two bills are the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act, also known as HR 4, and the For the People Act, known as HR 1.
Ian Millhiser
Yeah, let’s drill down a bit into them. So, one perennial problem we see is that a state will pass something, a law that’s already unconstitutional. Maybe it’s a racial gerrymander, maybe it’s just a way of disenfranchising people — but it could take the courts years to strike that law down. And in those years, the state’s running elections under this law that shouldn’t exist.
How do you prevent that from happening? How do you prevent lawmakers from enacting a law and running several elections under that law, and then maybe enacting something slightly different when the courts get around to striking it down?
Janai Nelson
Yeah, we have seen that happen time and again. Probably one of the most vexing problems for voting rights advocates is the idea that an election can take place under a law that is later found to be discriminatory.
The great thing is that the VRAA, the Voting Rights Advancement Act, which has been named after the late and legendary civil rights hero John Lewis, contains a “preclearance” provision that restores the powerful tool that was in the Voting Rights Act before the Supreme Court disabled it in 2013.
So states like Georgia and Texas and Alabama and Louisiana and many others would have to seek federal approval before they make a voting change. And that’s critical to prevent elections from occurring under laws that should never have been in place in the first place, and that serve to disenfranchise communities and largely Black communities.
Ian Millhiser
The first election I was really old enough to pay attention to was the 2000 election and specifically the 2000 election in Florida. I mean, it was a nightmare. And one of the things that made it a nightmare is that there was this purge list of voters who were kicked off of the voter rolls.
We don’t know how many people were purged who shouldn’t have been purged. But Bush’s margin of victory was about 500 votes. So there’s a decent likelihood that Al Gore would have become president if not for this purge list.
Why is voter registration still a thing that can be used to disenfranchise people? Why is it the case that your right to vote still depends on your name appearing on this registration list? And what does the legislation Congress is considering do to deal with that problem?
Janai Nelson
The 2000 election was the election that really was pivotal for me as well. In fact, it was the very first voting rights case that I ever litigated — to protect Black and Haitian American voters in Florida who had been disenfranchised, some because of the very practice that you mentioned, the voter purge.
So let’s just start with voter purging and then go back to voter registration issues in the 2000 election. There’s something called list maintenance, right? And it’s something that we want to see happen in our states where election officials ensure that the people who are registered to vote are still alive, that they still live in the appropriate jurisdiction, and that they meet all the qualifications that we have for voting. And that’s something that’s perfectly legitimate and fair.
The problem is that many election officials use what should be an innocuous process of just cleaning up the voter rolls to purge people intentionally from the rolls, to actively remove people from the rolls and to target particular groups that they don’t want to vote. We saw that in the 2000 election where at the time [Florida’s] governor instituted a purge process that targeted people with felony convictions.
If you happen to be a member of a community that has a disproportionate number of people with felony convictions, in that case the African American community, also the Latinx community, then you stand a greater likelihood of being kicked off of the rolls as part of that sweep. Not only if you happen to have a felony conviction, but even if you don’t. You may share a name with someone who has a felony conviction. You may be misidentified as someone who has a felony conviction.
Now, if we look at the question of voter registration, why do we need to affirmatively have citizens of this country bear such a disproportionate burden and onus to register? In my mind, it’s such an antiquated process. We’re one of the few democracies that places such a burden on voters to participate in our democracy.
What a growing number of states is doing now is allowing automatic voter registration. So when you turn 18 and you’re a citizen of this country, you can automatically be added to the voter rolls, and different states do it in different ways.
Oregon was the first state to do it in 2015. But since then we have 18 states [and the District of Columbia] that have some form of automatic voter registration, which has increased the voting rolls in many of those states. And there are estimates that suggest that in the first year alone, if we had national automatic voter registration, we might be able to add something like 22-27 million new voters to our voter registration rolls, which could be transformative, especially because it brings a lot of new younger voters into the electorate. And many of them happen to be people of color where we have the largest growing demographic of young people in this country.
Ian Millhiser
Gotcha. And if HR 1 passes, would it require states to have some form of automatic registration?
Janai Nelson
Yes, HR 1 would include nationwide automatic voter registration.
It also includes what is all-important, early voting, two weeks of early voting in every state, which takes the burden off of our election system on a single day, which still exists in some states.
It also marks Election Day as a federal holiday, which again eases the burden on individuals to participate in our democracy by making it a holiday and giving them the time that they need in order to cast their ballots.
And finally, the For the People Act also places some limitations on voter purges, which, again, for the reasons we discussed, is quite important.
Ian Millhiser
So let me switch to a different problem: gerrymandering. Gerrymandering is, I think, a bipartisan problem. But because Republicans happened to have a very good year in 2010, which was the year before the new maps were drawn, they got to do an oversized amount of gerrymandering. And so we’ve seen that in the elections we’ve had for the last 10 years.
What can be done? And what specifically is Congress considering right now to deal with this problem of gerrymandering?
Janai Nelson
Well, it takes us right back to the For the People Act, HR 1, which also deals with partisan gerrymandering.
It institutes nonpartisan commissions to draw electoral districts. And there are roughly 20 states that are already using either bipartisan or nonpartisan commissions to play some role in the redistricting process, which helps to reduce the partisan overreach that occurs, as you noted, from both parties, but has been exacerbated and just exponential in the hands of the Republican Party in recent years.
Ian Millhiser
There’s something that Stacey Abrams, the former Georgia gubernatorial candidate, said that stuck with me, which is that a lot of these laws that are being enacted by state legislatures and upheld by the courts are written to make voter suppression look like “user error.”
It’s not that you were denied the right to vote — it’s that you didn’t bring the right ID. It’s not that you were denied the right to vote — it’s that you didn’t sign your ballot in the right place.
What we see going on now, I think, is different than what happened in Mississippi in the 1950s in that it’s not a wholesale, “Well, I look at the color of your skin so you can’t vote.” It’s an attempt to make it look like it is the voter’s fault.
I guess given that framework, does that mean that voters have more control? Can they take matters into their own hands and make sure that they don’t get trapped by those sorts of things?
Janai Nelson
Voters in this country bear such a significant burden in ensuring that they have an opportunity to participate in our democracy.
That said, the reality is, in this moment, voters must be prepared to vote. There [are measures] that voters can take to do everything within their power to make sure that they are checking their registrations, that their registration is up to date, that they notify election officials if they move, that they know when early voting starts, that they know how they can cast a mail-in ballot.
All of that is information that is readily available to voters if they seek it. It’s unfortunate that they have to seek it. There should be means for voters to receive every possible entry point into our electoral system from state officials. But to the extent that that’s not happening, we’re asking that all voters do whatever it takes to ensure that they can cast a ballot this November.
Ian Millhiser
In the 1980s, the RNC had a scheme where they recruited a bunch of off duty police officers and I believe gave them armbands identifying them as election security with the apparent intent of intimidating Black and brown voters against voting.
And for many years, the RNC was under a court order saying, “Don’t do that.”
The court order has now been dissolved. And this will be the first presidential election without that court order in place. So how worried are you about voter intimidation? And what steps can be taken right now to make sure that voters aren’t scared out of casting their vote?
Janai Nelson
Voter intimidation is as old as this democracy. And the intimidation of Black voters in particular is as old as the 15th Amendment, granting black men the right to vote in 1870.
As you pointed out, there has been something of a control on voter intimidation since the 1980s where you mentioned the off-duty police officers who not only were wearing blue armbands, but they were also armed with service revolvers and they swarmed precincts, many of which were in Black and brown communities in New Jersey and other neighborhoods like that to intimidate them and to deter them from casting their constitutional right to vote.
It took a lawsuit to disband this so-called National Ballot Security Task Force. And what’s interesting is that — I think not so coincidentally now that that consent decree has expired — Trump stated very recently that we are going to have sheriffs, law enforcement, US attorneys, and attorneys general at the polls.
That in and of itself is voter intimidation. To suggest that you have to navigate law enforcement and people who could prosecute you in order to cast a ballot is intimidation on its face.
And just recently, Michigan voters received robocalls misinforming them that voting by mail might expose their personal information to creditors and to law enforcement and even to the CDC for purposes of a forced vaccination.
It’s that type of misinformation that groups like the Legal Defense Fund are combating by telling voters to be discerning, that if they have a question about a voting rule or law or barrier that they hear about, that they check it with a trusted source. Which is why we are part of an election protection network and force that will have people on the ground on Election Day, that will have people available by phone at 866-OUR-VOTE in order to field calls and complaints and to hopefully get relief, and to go to the court, if necessary, to prevent any further intimidation from happening from the polls.
Ian Millhiser
So that number that you just said. 866-OUR-VOTE. If I receive a call telling me if I vote, then there’ll be some terrible consequence, that’s the number that I can call to get credible advice on whether I actually need to worry.
Janai Nelson
That’s right. You can get credible advice on whether that is a legitimate instruction. And it’s also very helpful for us to be able to track what intimidation tactics are being used. And there are many places to go for information if you want to know your polling site, if you know your registration status, there are all sorts of government, as well as civil rights funded sites that can give you that information
Ian Millhiser
Can you name a few of those sites?
Janai Nelson
All voters can go to usa.gov/confirm-voter-registration to check and see if they’re registered to vote. And you can just type in basic information about where you’re located and your name and find out immediately if you are registered to vote.
And the Legal Defense Fund recently launched a microsite that is devoted to voting and voting rights information. It’s a one-stop shop for everything you might want to know about voting rights, including census and redistricting, which is all tied in to this intricate election system that we have. And that voting site is voting.naacpldf.org.
Ian Millhiser
And that’s a good reminder that anyone listening who hasn’t filled out their census form, go do that.
Janai Nelson
Yes, that is critical. Be counted.
Ian Millhiser
So: What is your plan to make sure that your vote is counted?
Janai Nelson
Well, I’m proud to say that I’ve already requested my absentee ballot here in my home state of New York. Early voting here begins October 24 and it ends November 1. And I intend to physically turn in my ballot at a precinct during that early voting period to ensure that it is received and counted.
And frankly, that’s the recommended plan that we have for anyone who plans to vote by mail, that you request your ballot early, if your state requires that you request and not receive it without any demand, and that you physically turn it in to a designated local election drop off or precinct that will take your ballot.
Of course, if you are planning to vote in person, you know, gear up that day and be prepared to face whatever obstacles may come up, including long lines and other issues, ID, if that’s required in your state. And everyone should be reaching out to their networks to make sure that everyone they know is also equally prepared to vote.
And finally, one of the things that the Legal Defense Fund is working on with the More Than A Vote organization that was started by LeBron James is a poll worker recruitment drive. If you have the ability to serve as a poll worker in this upcoming election, please do so. We are facing a shortage of poll workers.
You can go to powerthepolls.org and sign up to find out more about how to become a poll worker in your jurisdiction to help ensure that everyone can cast an equal ballot and receives the assistance that they need in this election.