DIRECT DEMOCRACY
Fights over the rules of U.S. democracy are often waged in courtrooms, state legislatures, and elections offices.
But with midterm voting already underway, they’re also playing out at the ballot box. From the West Coast to the Great Plains to the Eastern Seaboard, voters will have the chance to approve or reject proposed new ballot measures that could have major consequences for how future elections are run.
In California, Arizona, Nevada, and Colorado, voters are deciding whether to approve Republican- or conservative-backed measures imposing new ID requirements for casting ballots. Several other states are asking voters to add bans on noncitizen voting to their constitutions.
Voters in other states can choose to move in the opposite direction. Virginians are mulling whether to restore voting rights to ex-offenders. Massachusetts voters are considering whether to establish same-day registration. And Missourians have a chance to take a stand for fair maps and reject a GOP gerrymander.
In all, these 25 ballot measures in 20 states have crucial implications for voting access, fair representation, direct democracy, or other issues affecting fair elections. We classified them as either “pro-voter” or “anti-voter” based on their impact. And we’ll update this page after Election Day to let you know which of these measures passed and which failed.
Ballot Measure 3 | Noncitizen Voting Ban
This initiative, which made the ballot after a signature-gathering campaign by supporters, would reword Alaska’s voter qualification law to explicitly ban noncitizens from voting. The legal impact would likely be minimal, because state law already is understood to prohibit noncitizen voting. The measure, and similar ones in other states, appear aimed largely at encouraging voter turnout among Republicans, and promoting a false narrative about widespread noncitizen voting.
Back to the top
Proposition 144 | Voter ID for Mail Voting and Other Restrictions
This measure, proposed by the GOP-controlled state legislature, would amend Arizona’s constitution to create a voter ID requirement, even for mail voters. It also would restrict voting to American citizens; bar noncitizens from contributing to campaigns; provide voters with the option to have their ballots tabulated at their voting location on election day; and make it harder to expand early and mail voting. And it would make voting laws subject to a lower standard of review by courts, with the result that it would be harder to overturn anti-voting laws.
Most of the measure’s provisions — though not the lowered standard of legal review — are already in state or federal law, or the Arizona constitution. Proposals like this one are often intended to boost GOP turnout and promote myths about noncitizen voting.
Back to the top
Issue 1 | Noncitizen Voting Ban
This measure, referred by the GOP-controlled legislature, would amend the state constitution to explicitly ban noncitizens from voting — something Arkansas law already does. Proposals like this one are often intended to boost GOP turnout and promote myths about noncitizen voting.
Back to the top
Proposition 39 | Voter ID Requirement
This measure, which made the ballot after a signature-gathering campaign by supporters, would change the state constitution to require voters to provide ID when voting by mail or in person. The state would be required to provide free IDs upon request. The measure would also require county election officials to “use best efforts” to verify the citizenship of registered voters using voter data, and report what percentage of their county’s rolls they have verified.
Proposition 43 | Supermajority Requirement for Some Local Tax Changes
In California, local governments must receive voter approval before imposing special taxes. But this constitutional amendment, proposed by the Democratic-controlled state legislature, would add an additional hurdle to the process by requiring many ballot measures to receive a two-thirds supermajority from voters (66.67%) if they raise local taxes. Supermajority requirements for ballot measures have become a common tool to undermine direct democracy.
Back to the top
Note: Constitutional amendments in Colorado must receive at least 55% of the vote to pass.
Amendment 84 | Voter ID for Mail Ballots
This measure made the ballot after a signature-gathering campaign by Advance Colorado, a conservative group pushing several other right-wing ballot measures in the state. It would change the constitution to require voters to include both their signature and the last four digits of their Social Security number, driver’s license number, or other state-issued REAL ID number on the return envelope of mail ballots. Colorado has universal vote-by-mail elections, automatically sending a mail ballot to every registered voter.
Amendment 85 | Ballot Question Language Requirement
This measure — also pushed by Advance Colorado — would add a requirement to the state constitution that all future ballot questions be in plain language at no more than an eighth-grade reading level, and would prohibit any statutorily required language before or after a ballot title. Colorado law already requires all ballot questions to be in plain language, and opponents argue that the new requirement — which is silent on how to decide whether a proposed ballot question is at an eighth-grade reading level — would lead to more legal disputes over language, making it easier to keep popular measures off the ballot.
Amendment 86 | Mid-Decade Redistricting Restrictions
This proposed constitutional amendment, which made the ballot after a signature-gathering campaign by Advance Colorado, a conservative group pushing several other right-wing ballot measures in the state, would create additional obstacles to mid-decade congressional redistricting. It would require any attempt to be approved by the state’s independent redistricting commission and the state supreme court, as well as barring any map that “purposefully favor[s] one political party.” It would make it all but impossible for Colorado to redraw its congressional map to counter the slew of GOP gerrymanders conducted at the demand of President Donald Trump. A PAC created by U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) has donated $250,000 to the initiative campaign.
Back to the top
HJR 4 | Ban on Legalizing Marijuana via Ballot Measure
This measure, referred by the GOP-controlled legislature, would change the constitution to bar future ballot initiatives legalizing marijuana or other drugs. There are no other restrictions on the kind of laws Idaho voters can pass by initiative.
Back to the top
Constitutional Amendment, § 1. Qualifications of electors | Noncitizen Voting Ban
This measure, referred by the GOP-controlled legislature, would change the state constitution to explicitly bar noncitizens from voting. It is already illegal for noncitizens to vote in Kansas, so the measure won’t have any practical effect. Proposals like this one are often intended to boost GOP turnout and promote myths about noncitizen voting.
Back to the top
Question 3 | Congressional Redistricting Reform
This measure, referred by the Democratic-controlled legislature, would change the constitution to clarify that rules requiring maps to meet certain criteria only apply to state legislative districts, not congressional districts. It would also allow the state legislature to give the state Supreme Court original jurisdiction over congressional redistricting cases. The goal is to make it easier for Maryland Democrats to counter the wave of Trump-backed GOP gerrymanders by redrawing the state’s congressional map.
Back to the top
Note: Constitutional amendments in Massachusetts must receive over 50% of votes cast on the question and at least 30% of the total ballots cast in the election.
Question 4 | Same-Day Voter Registration
This measure, which made the ballot after a signature-gathering campaign by supporters, would adopt same-day voter registration in Massachusetts, allowing eligible voters to register, or update their registration, and vote, through Election Day.
Back to the top
Constitutional Amendment 6 | Direct Democracy Protections
This measure, which made the ballot after a signature-gathering campaign by supporters, would amend the state constitution to strengthen the initiative and referendum (I&R) process and protect it from interference by the GOP-controlled state legislature. These changes include making the I&R process a fundamental right, and prohibiting the legislature from weakening the I&R process through things like adding restrictions on signature gathering, limiting the kinds of laws the I&R process can address, and raising the vote threshold needed to pass an initiative. It also would make it harder for lawmakers to repeal or amend a law passed by voters. The measure is a response by direct democracy advocates to Amendment 4, an attempt by the state legislature to make it harder to pass initiatives, which voters rejected in August.
Proposition A | Congressional Gerrymander Veto
This referendum, which made the ballot after a signature-gathering campaign by supporters, would block the mid-decade gerrymander Republicans passed last year at the urging of Trump. The GOP-backed map, if allowed to stand, would eliminate a Democratic seat in Kansas City. Efforts by GOP officials to keep this measure off the ballot — and to put the gerrymandered map into effect for the 2026 elections, before voters could weigh in, in violation of state law — led to a tsunami of litigation. The U.S. Supreme Court ultimately blocked the gerrymander from going into effect for the midterms.
Note: Under Missouri’s constitution, the referendum is technically a chance for voters to veto the gerrymander. This means that voters will be asked whether to approve the map. A ‘No’ vote is the pro-voting position, blocking the map, while a ‘Yes’ vote is the anti-voting position, approving the map.
Back to the top
Constitutional Initiative No. 133 | Direct Democracy Protections
This proposed constitutional amendment, which made the ballot after a signature-gathering campaign by supporters, comes in response to attacks on the initiative process by GOP lawmakers across the country. It would make several changes to the state constitution to strengthen and protect the initiative and referendum (I&R) process from interference by the state legislature. These changes include making the I&R process a fundamental right under the state constitution, limiting the government’s ability to change an initiative’s ballot language, ensuring the timely resolution of legal challenges, and prohibiting unjustified burdens on the signature-gathering process.
Back to the top
Question No. 7 | Voter ID Requirement
This amendment, which made the ballot after a signature-gathering campaign by supporters, would add a voter ID requirement to the state constitution. In-person voters would have to provide a state-issued photo ID to vote, and mail voters would have to include the last four digits of their Social Security number or Nevada driver’s license number next to their signature on the mail ballot return envelope.
Voters must approve constitutional amendments in Nevada at two successive general elections. Voters approved this measure in 2024, and it will be added to the constitution if passed again this year.
Back to the top
Constitutional Amendment 2 | Boosting Turnout for School Board Elections
This amendment, referred by the Democratic-controlled legislature, would remove the provision in the state constitution requiring school board elections to be held at different times from partisan elections like those for federal and state offices. Elections that are not held at the same time as those for statewide and federal office generally have very low voter turnout. Allowing school board elections to be consolidated with other elections will let more voters participate.
Back to the top
Constitutional Amendment – Require Photo ID for Voting | Voter ID for Mail Ballots
This measure, referred by the GOP-controlled legislature, would change the state constitution to require photo ID to vote by mail — something state law already requires. Currently, the constitution requires only in-person voters to provide ID. The measure appears designed to motivate Republican voters to turn out in a year when Democrats hope to break the GOP’s supermajority in the state legislature.
Back to the top
Constitutional Measure No. 1 | Supermajority Requirement for Constitutional Amendments
This measure, referred by the GOP-controlled legislature, would make it much harder to amend the state constitution via ballot measure, by raising the threshold for passage from a simple majority to 60%. It’s part of a larger attack by GOP lawmakers on direct democracy, with voters rejecting similar proposals in Ohio, Arkansas, and South Dakota.
Back to the top
Issue 3 | Voter ID Requirement
This measure, referred by the GOP-controlled legislature, would amend the state constitution to add a photo ID requirement for in-person and mail voting. Ohio law already requires photo ID to vote in person and by mail. This would not create any new requirements, but would embed current requirements into the state constitution.
Back to the top
Constitutional Amendment J | Noncitizen Voting Ban
This measure, referred by the GOP-controlled legislature, would change the state constitution to bar noncitizens from voting. It’s already illegal for noncitizens to vote in South Dakota, so this won’t have any practical effect on whether non-citizens can vote. Ballot measures like this one are being used to inspire voter turnout among Republicans in a bad year for the GOP and promote a false narrative about widespread non-citizen voting.
Constitutional Amendment L | Supermajority Requirement for Constitutional Amendments
This measure, referred by the GOP-controlled legislature, would raise the threshold to amend the state constitution from a simple majority to 60%. In recent years, some states have tried to raise the threshold for constitutional amendments as part of a larger attack on direct democracy. Voters in South Dakota have rejected similar measures twice in the past decade, including an identical amendment in 2022 and a proposal to raise the threshold to 55% in 2018. Earlier this year, a federal court blocked a law that would have made it difficult for South Dakota voters to put initiatives on the ballot.
Back to the top
Constitutional Amendment B | Supermajority Requirement for Initiatives Affecting Taxes
This measure, referred by the GOP-controlled legislature, would raise the threshold to pass ballot initiatives that raise taxes from a simple majority to 60%. The state legislature has tried to undermine the initiative process several times in recent years, interfering with voter-passed initiatives on issues like redistricting and medical marijuana. The legislature tried and failed to raise the threshold for all initiatives to 60% in 2023, and this amendment represents an attempt by one of the sponsors of that effort to pass a slightly narrower version.
Back to the top
Proposed Constitutional Amendment Question 3 | Restoring voting rights to ex-offenders
This amendment, referred by the Democratic-controlled legislature, would change the state constitution to establish a fundamental right to vote for anyone who meets the state’s voter qualifications, and automatically restore voting and all other political rights for anyone convicted of a felony once they complete their sentence. Virginia has one of the harshest felony disenfranchisement laws in the country, a policy that — by design — disproportionately deprives racial minorities of voting rights. Earlier this year, a federal court ruled that the state constitution’s felony disenfranchisement provision was too broad, narrowing the kinds of felony convictions that would trigger lifetime disenfranchisement. This measure would go further, restoring voting rights for anyone who has completed their sentence.
Back to the top
Amendment No. 1 | Noncitizen Voting Ban
This measure, referred by the GOP-controlled legislature, would reword the state constitution’s voter qualification provision to make clear only citizens are allowed to vote. It is already illegal for noncitizens to vote in West Virginia, so this won’t have any practical effect on whether non-citizens can vote, and ballot measures like this one are being used to encourage voter turnout among Republicans in a bad year for the GOP and promote a false narrative about widespread non-citizen voting.
Back to the top ↑
Research and writing by Dave O’Brien. Editing by Zachary Roth. Graphic design and layout by Megan Lee and Madison Coviello.
We depend on your support to keep bringing you the latest information and insight on the fight for democracy — always free and available for all. After all, we can’t fight for the future of our democracy unless we know what’s happening.
Democracy Docket is the leading digital news platform dedicated to information, analysis and opinion about voting rights and elections in the courts.
© Democracy Docket, LLC 2026
About the Author
