H.R. 14 — John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act of 2025

This section establishes the short title of the Act as the “John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act of 2025.”

This section revises Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (52 U.S.C. 10301) to expand and specify the standards for vote dilution, vote denial, and vote abridgment claims. It amends subsection (a) to prohibit voting rules imposed “for the purpose of, or” in a discriminatory manner and to make clear that the prohibition applies as provided in new subsections (b), (c), (d), or (f). For vote dilution claims, the section adds a new threshold test requiring a plaintiff to show that: (1) the protected class is sufficiently numerous and geographically compact to form a majority in a single-member district; (2) the protected class is politically cohesive; and (3) the remaining voters in the district usually vote as a bloc to defeat the protected class’s preferred candidates. It then requires courts, after that showing, to conduct a totality-of-the-circumstances analysis that includes specified factors such as the history of official voting discrimination, racially polarized voting, use of practices that enhance discrimination, denial of access to candidate slating processes, the effects of discrimination in education, employment, health, housing, and transportation, racial appeals in campaigns, and the extent to which protected-class members have been elected to office. The section also authorizes courts to consider other relevant factors, including whether elected officials have been responsive to the protected class and whether the challenged practice is supported by a valid and substantiated State interest. It further provides that a protected class may include a cohesive coalition of members of different racial or language minority groups. For vote denial or abridgment claims, the section adds a new subsection establishing a violation when a challenged voting rule results, or will result, in members of a protected class facing greater costs or burdens than other voters and those burdens are linked, at least in part, to social and historical conditions producing discrimination against that class. It specifies that the absolute number or percentage of voters affected is not dispositive and that the affected area may be smaller than the jurisdiction covered by the rule. It also provides that the challenged rule need only be a but-for cause of the discriminatory result or perpetuate preexisting burdens or costs.

This section revises Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (52 U.S.C. 10301 et seq.) to establish that a State or political subdivision violates the Act when it enacts or seeks to administer any voting qualification, prerequisite, standard, practice, or procedure that has the purpose or effect of diminishing the ability of citizens, on account of race or color or in contravention of section 4(f)(2), to participate in the electoral process or elect their preferred candidates of choice. It applies this standard to actions taken on or after January 1, 2021, and provides that final decisions of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on section 5 preclearance applications or petitions supersede this new subsection.

This section expands the circumstances under which a court may authorize Federal observers and retain jurisdiction under Section 3 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 by replacing the existing reference to “violations of the fourteenth or fifteenth amendment” with “violations of the 14th or 15th Amendment, violations of this Act, or violations of any Federal law that prohibits discrimination in voting on the basis of race, color, or membership in a language minority group” in 52 U.S.C. § 10302(a) and (c). (Thus, courts may now act not only for constitutional voting-rights violations, but also for violations of the Voting Rights Act and other federal voting-discrimination laws.)

This section revises the coverage formula in section 4(b) of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (52 U.S.C. 10303(b)) to determine when the preclearance requirements in section 4(a) apply to a State or political subdivision during a calendar year. It replaces the prior reliance on historical “tests or devices” with a new 25-year lookback for “voting rights violations” and applies subsection (a) to a State and all of its political subdivisions if, during the previous 25 calendar years, either (1) 15 or more voting rights violations occurred in the State, (2) 10 or more voting rights violations occurred in the State, including at least 1 committed by the State itself, or (3) 3 or more voting rights violations occurred in the State and the State itself administers the elections in the affected State or subdivisions. It also applies subsection (a) to a political subdivision as a separate unit if 3 or more voting rights violations occurred in the subdivision during the previous 25 calendar years. This section establishes a 10-year period of application for covered States and political subdivisions, beginning on January 1 of the year coverage applies and ending 10 years later. It further provides that, if a State or political subdivision obtains and retains a declaratory judgment under subsection (a), coverage under paragraph (1) ends unless new qualifying voting rights violations occur after the judgment. As background, section 4(a) requires certain jurisdictions to obtain federal approval before enforcing changes to voting laws or practices. This section defines a “voting rights violation” to include: (1) final judgments or certain preliminary, temporary, or declaratory relief finding race discrimination or an undue burden on the right to vote in violation of the 14th or 15th Amendment; (2) similar relief finding violations of section 4(e), 4(f), section 2, section 201, or section 203 of the Act; (3) final judgments denying a State or subdivision’s request for a declaratory judgment under section 3(c) or section 5; and (4) objections interposed by the Attorney General under section 3(c) or section 5 that prevent enforcement of a voting qualification, prerequisite, standard, practice, or procedure. It excludes objections that are later withdrawn unless the withdrawal responds to a change in the law or practice that was the basis for the objection, and excludes objections based solely on a failure to comply with a procedural requirement that would not otherwise affect the merits of the voting change.

This section establishes a practice-based preclearance regime under the Voting Rights Act of 1965 by requiring each State and political subdivision to identify newly enacted or adopted voting laws, regulations, or policies that fall within specified covered practices and to ensure those changes are not implemented until the jurisdiction complies with preclearance requirements. It directs the Attorney General, in consultation with the Director of the Bureau of the Census and other relevant federal officials, to make annual determinations as early as practicable each calendar year regarding voting-age population characteristics and to publish the covered States and political subdivisions in the Federal Register, with those determinations effective upon publication. As background, preclearance is a voting-rights enforcement mechanism that requires covered jurisdictions to obtain approval before implementing certain voting changes. This section defines covered practices to include: (1) changes to the method of election that add at-large seats or convert single-member district seats to at-large or multi-member district seats in jurisdictions where two or more racial groups or language minority groups each comprise at least 20 percent of the voting-age population, or where a single language minority group comprises at least 20 percent of the voting-age population on Indian lands; (2) changes to jurisdiction boundaries that reduce by 3 or more percentage points the share of the voting-age population made up of a single racial group or language minority group in jurisdictions meeting the same 20 percent thresholds; (3) redistricting changes in jurisdictions where a racial group or language minority group that is not the largest group and that comprises at least 15 percent of the voting-age population experiences a population increase of at least 20 percent over the preceding decade; (4) changes to documentation or proof-of-identity requirements for voting or registration that are more stringent than State law on the day before enactment of the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act of 2025, including a requirement that voters be allowed to cast a ballot by sworn written statement in person or by mail if the State requires identification to receive and cast a ballot in a Federal election; (5) changes that reduce multilingual voting materials or alter how those materials are provided or distributed without a similar change in English-language materials; and (6) changes that reduce, consolidate, or relocate voting locations, or reduce Sunday in-person voting hours before an election.

This section establishes new transparency requirements under the Voting Rights Act of 1965 by adding a new section 6 to 52 U.S.C. 10301 et seq. It requires a State or political subdivision that changes any voting qualification, prerequisite, standard, practice, or procedure for a Federal election to provide public notice, on its website and in the jurisdiction, of a concise description of the change and the difference from the rule in effect 180 days before the election, in a format accessible to voters with disabilities, within 48 hours after making the change. This section also requires States and political subdivisions responsible for assigning registered voters, voting machines, and poll workers to precincts and polling places to provide public notice, no later than the 30th day before a Federal election, of specified precinct and polling place information, including the name or number, polling place address and accessibility, voting-age population, number of registered voters, number of voting machines and accessible machines, number of paid and volunteer poll workers, and polling place dates and hours. If any of that information changes, the jurisdiction must update the notice within 48 hours after the change occurs, or as soon as practicable if the change occurs fewer than 48 hours before the election. This section further requires public notice, within 10 days after a change, of demographic and electoral data for any change in the constituency that will participate in an election or in the boundaries of a voting unit or electoral district, including changes made through redistricting, reapportionment, or shifts between at-large and district-based elections. It applies to the State or political subdivision as a whole, any voting unit or district that is replaced or eliminated, and any new voting unit or district established by the change.

This section revises the authority to appoint and assign Federal observers under the Voting Rights Act of 1965 by transferring that authority from the Director of the Office of Personnel Management to the Attorney General. It amends 52 U.S.C. 10302(a) to require the Attorney General, rather than the United States Civil Service Commission, to appoint observers in enforcement proceedings under section 3 of the Act, and amends 52 U.S.C. 10305(a) and (c) to direct the Attorney General to assign and compensate observers. It also expands the circumstances under which observers may be assigned by authorizing their use when the Attorney General determines they are necessary to enforce the guarantees of the 14th or 15th Amendment, any provision of the Voting Rights Act, or any other Federal law protecting the right to vote, and by adding a new basis for observer assignment in political subdivisions where the Attorney General certifies that written meritorious complaints indicate likely violations of section 203 of the Act or that observers are otherwise necessary to enforce section 203’s bilingual election requirements. Finally, it amends 52 U.S.C. 10309(a)(1) to conform the termination of certain observer appointments to the new Attorney General authority.

This section expands private enforcement authority under the Voting Rights Act of 1965 by allowing an aggrieved person, in addition to the Attorney General, to bring actions for declaratory or injunctive relief against poll taxes under 52 U.S.C. 10306(b), to challenge voting qualifications and practices that violate the Constitution, the Voting Rights Act, or other federal voting discrimination laws under 52 U.S.C. 10308(d), to seek judicial relief against prohibited acts or practices under title II under 52 U.S.C. 10504, and to enforce the Twenty-Sixth Amendment under 52 U.S.C. 10701. (Thus, the bill authorizes private plaintiffs to seek the same forms of relief previously available only to the Department of Justice in these voting-rights cases.)

This section revises the standard for granting preliminary relief in actions for preventive relief under section 12(d) of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (52 U.S.C. 10308(d)) and limits the use of a jurisdiction’s inability to enforce its voting or election laws as a basis for a stay or interlocutory appeal under 28 U.S.C. § 1253. Specifically, it requires a court to grant preliminary relief if the complainant raises a serious question about whether the challenged voting qualification, prerequisite, standard, practice, or procedure violates the Voting Rights Act or the Constitution and the hardship to the defendant is less than the hardship to the plaintiff if relief is denied. The section also directs courts, when evaluating changes to voting rules, to consider all relevant factors and give due weight to four specified factors, if present: (1) whether the prior rule was adopted as a remedy for a federal court judgment, consent decree, or admission involving discrimination or voting-rights violations under the 14th, 15th, 19th, 24th, or 26th Amendments, the Voting Rights Act, or other federal or state law; (2) whether the prior rule served as a ground for dismissal or settlement of such a claim; (3) whether the change was adopted fewer than 180 days before the election in which it takes effect; and (4) whether the defendant failed to provide timely or complete notice of the change as required by law. Finally, it provides that a jurisdiction’s inability to enforce its voting or election laws, regulations, policies, or redistricting plans, standing alone, does not constitute irreparable harm to the public interest or to the defendant for purposes of a stay or interlocutory appeal under 28 U.S.C. § 1253. (Thus, courts may not rely solely on nonenforcement concerns to block preliminary relief in voting-rights cases.)

This section amends the attorney’s fees provision in 42 U.S.C. § 1988(b) to authorize courts, in their discretion, to award reasonable attorney’s fees to prevailing parties in actions to enforce a provision described in section 2(a) of the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act of 2025, in addition to the civil rights laws already listed. (Thus, fee-shifting would apply to voting-rights claims brought under the constitutional and statutory provisions identified in section 2(a), including the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and related federal voting laws.)

This section establishes a new Voting Rights Act enforcement authority under 52 U.S.C. § 10308(g) that allows the Attorney General, or the Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights if designated, to issue written demands for documentary material and written answers from a State, political subdivision, or other governmental representative or agent before filing a civil action. The demand must identify the voting qualification, prerequisite, standard, practice, procedure, or other voting-related matter under investigation and the Federal civil rights provisions at issue, and it may require production of documents, written answers, or both. The provision requires at least 20 days’ notice for production or responses, permits service by a U.S. marshal, deputy marshal, or certified mail, and allows the Attorney General to seek a federal court order enforcing the demand if the recipient does not comply. It also permits the recipient to seek modification and requires a sworn certificate stating that all responsive materials or information have been produced or explaining any objection or omission.

This section adds definitions to Title I of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, including a definition of “Indian lands” that incorporates “Indian country” as defined in 18 U.S.C. § 1151, certain Alaska Native lands owned under the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act, tribal seats of government, and tribal or Alaska Native village statistical areas identified by the Bureau of the Census in the most recent decennial census. It also defines “Indian,” “Indian tribe” or “tribe,” “Tribal Government,” and “voting-age population” for purposes of the Act. (Thus, the new definitions specify which lands and populations are counted when applying Title I’s voting-rights provisions to tribal and Alaska Native communities.)

This section defines “prevailing party” for purposes of the Voting Rights Act of 1965’s attorney’s fees provision under 52 U.S.C. § 10310(c) to mean a party that receives at least some of the benefit sought by the action, states a colorable claim, and can establish that the action was a significant cause of a change to the status quo. (Thus, a party may qualify for a fee award only if the lawsuit materially contributed to the change it sought.)

This section revises section 3(c) of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (52 U.S.C. 10302(c)) to apply when any party, including the Attorney General, brings any action under any statute to enforce the voting guarantees of the Fourteenth or Fifteenth Amendment, rather than only when the Attorney General or an aggrieved person institutes a proceeding, and it changes the timing reference from when the “proceeding” was commenced to when the “action” was commenced. This section also makes conforming changes to section 4(f) of the Voting Rights Act (52 U.S.C. 10303(f)) by striking the second sentence of paragraph (1) and deleting paragraphs (3) and (4), thereby removing specified statutory language governing treatment of members of language minority groups. This section revises section 5 of the Voting Rights Act (52 U.S.C. 10304) by replacing the existing coverage trigger tied to determinations under section 4(b) with a rule that applies when such determinations are in effect during a calendar year, and by replacing the date range “November 1, 1964” through “November 1, 1972” with the “applicable date of coverage.” It also defines “applicable date of coverage” as June 25, 2013, for a State or political subdivision whose most recent section 4(b) determination was made on or before December 31, 2025, or as the date of that most recent determination if it was made after December 31, 2025.

This section establishes a severability clause for the Act and the amendments made by the Act. Thus, if any provision of the Act, any amendment made by the Act, or the application of any such provision or amendment to any person or circumstance is held unconstitutional, enjoined, or otherwise unenforceable, the remainder of the Act, the remaining amendments, and the remaining provisions of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 would remain in effect.

This section establishes a grant program under which the Attorney General must award annual grants to small jurisdictions to help them comply with the Voting Rights Act of 1965 notice requirements for changes to voting qualifications, prerequisites, standards, practices, or procedures. As background, those notice requirements are intended to ensure that changes affecting voting are publicly disclosed before they take effect. The section defines a small jurisdiction as any political subdivision of a state with a population of 10,000 or less and requires eligible applicants to submit an application in the form and with the information the Attorney General requires regarding their Voting Rights Act compliance.