In House Committee·Last action 429 days ago

Some election changes would need federal review before taking effect

Officially: John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act of 2025

States and local areas with recent voting rights problems could not make some election changes on their own. They would first need approval from a federal court or the U.S. Attorney General. The bill also gives courts clearer rules for voting rights cases.

Where it stands

Sitting in House Committee

No vote scheduled. Constituent contact is what moves bills out of committee.

What this bill actually does

The bill gives courts clearer rules for two kinds of voting rights cases. One covers vote dilution, like unfair district maps. The other covers vote denial or abridgment, like rules that burden protected groups more heavily.
A voting rule can violate the law even if discrimination was only one reason for it. For some claims, challengers must also prove the rule caused a discriminatory impact.
Changes made on or after January 1, 2021, could violate the law if they reduce protected voters’ power. This is called retrogression, meaning the change moves voters backward. A federal preclearance ruling from a Washington, D.C., district court could override this rule.

↓ Why your message matters here

This bill is sitting in committee with no scheduled vote — which means a small number of constituent messages can decide whether it moves forward or quietly dies.

Where your representatives stand

Enter your ZIP to see how your senators and member of Congress have voted, sponsored, or spoken on this bill.

The debate

What people are saying about this bill

✓Arguments in support

Restores Protections: Supporters say the bill restores important protections that were weakened by past Supreme Court decisions, ensuring fair voting practices.
Addresses Ongoing Discrimination: The bill responds to evidence of ongoing voting discrimination, making it harder for unfair practices to continue.
Modernizes Voting Protections: By using recent data to determine which areas need oversight, the bill is seen as a modern approach to protecting voting rights.

✕Arguments against

Federal Overreach: Critics argue that the bill gives too much power to the federal government over state and local election processes.
Burden on States: Some believe that requiring preclearance for voting changes places an unnecessary burden on states and local governments.
Outdated Criteria: Opponents may question whether historical patterns of discrimination are relevant to current voting practices.

Where this bill is in the process

Legislative timeline

✓

Introduced

Introduced in House

—

●

House Committee

Under House committee consideration

Latest: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary. (3/5/2025)

MAR 5

○

House Floor Vote

Voted on by House

—

○

Passed House

Approved by House

—

○

Senate Review

Sent to Senate for consideration

—

○

Passed Both Chambers

Approved by both House and Senate

—

○

Signed into Law

Signed by the President

—

For more detail

Menu

Some election changes would need federal review before taking effect

Where your representatives stand

What people are saying about this bill

Legislative timeline

Read deeper