Back in January 2026, U.S. District Court Judge John Gabney ruled that Virginia must allow felons to register to vote unless they were convicted of an offense that was a “common-law felony” in 1870. The basis for this ruling was that when Virginia was readmitted to the Union, the readmission act specified that Virginia could not curtail anyone’s voting rights except for individuals who had been convicted of a “common-law” felony. The 2026 ruling determined that there are only eleven such felonies.

Since then, Virginia elections officials have prepared their own list of crimes that it believes were “common-law” felonies back in 1870. The state’s list includes 284 crimes.

On August 19, the Judge ruled that the state’s list is far too expansive, and he repeated his own ruling that there are only eleven such types of crimes. See the ruling here.

On September 4, the Alaska State Court of Appeals issued an order to stop the ongoing criminal prosecution of Tupe Smith. Smith v State of Alaska, A-14529. Here is the order.

Tupe Smith, who was born in American Samoa, was elected to the School Board of Whittier in 2023. But then it was discovered that she should never have been allowed to register to vote, because she had been born in American Samoa and had never been naturalized. American Samoans are the only people who live in a U.S. possession who are not deemed to be U.S. citizens at birth. Instead they are classed as “U.S. Nationals.”

When Smith registered to vote in Alaska, there was no checkbox for “U.S. National”. She asked the election official for advice and was told to check the box that said she was a citizen. The State Court of Appeals noted that in order for her to be prosecuted for the felony of falsely registering to vote, the Alaska law requires that the prosecution show that the misconduct was made “intentionally.” The court then concluded that Smith had not intentionally done anything wrong. The opinion contrasts “intentionally” with “knowingly”.

On September 3, the South Carolina Election Commission filed this brief in defense of the state’s open primary. The Republican Party is trying to persuade a U.S. District Court that the party has a right to a closed primary. South Carolina Republican Party v Bolchoz, 3:26cv-2699.

The state’s brief points out that the Greenville County Republican Party already lost a similar case in 2011. The state also emphasizes that the Republican Party is already free to avoid an open primary if it uses its option to nominate by convention. The state already gives every party the freedom to choose a primary or a convention. However, the law requires that state central committee of any party that wants a convention to pass the idea with a three-fourths vote.