America's founders left elections largely in the hands of states, creating a system where the rules for voting can change dramatically depending on where you live.

After 1877, former Confederate states passed poll taxes, literacy tests, property requirements, and grandfather clauses to disenfranchise Black voters—restrictions that remained in place for nearly a century until the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

Since 1965, federal oversight has blocked thousands of state-level voting changes—including redistricting plans—by requiring approval for measures that could affect minority representation, a process scaled back by the Supreme Court in 2013.

Signed into law in 1965, the Voting Rights Act aimed to end racial discrimination in voting. This resource traces its creation and explains how later court rulings have weakened its enforcement power over time.

The Voting Rights Act of 1965 expanded the Department of Justice's power to challenge discriminatory election laws, send federal examiners, and supervise voting changes in areas with histories of voter suppression—although some of these powers have been limited by court rulings since then.

Literacy tests, poll taxes, and even explicit laws kept Black Americans off juries until well into the 20th century. The Jury Selection and Service Act of 1968 mandated that federal juries reflect a fair cross-section of the community, though racial disparities in jury selection persist.

Ratified in 1870, the 15th Amendment prohibited federal and state governments from denying the right to vote based on race, color, or previous condition of servitude—enfranchising millions of Black men.

This podcast episode traces how the Electoral College emerged from rushed compromises, slavery-era power politics, and party maneuvering—showing why the system looks the way it does today and why efforts to change it have repeatedly stalled.

This article examines how the Electoral College emerged from political compromise, including efforts to placate slave-owning Southern states and concerns that Northern states would dominate a direct national presidential vote.

The USA has seen some crazy elections. Election fraud is vanishingly rare now, but here are the craziest cases of election fraud in U.S. history.

In settling on the rules for how the US elects presidents, the Founding Fathers coalesced around a system built on two inputs: Votes from individual voters, and the accumulation of votes from specially chosen Electors. The latter comprise the US Electoral College, and this Washington Post article explains why it exists, how it works, and how its 538 electors collectively decide presidential elections.

This article explains how the Constitution leaves most rules for choosing electors to the states. Today, parties typically select elector slates through state conventions, rewarding loyal supporters who formally cast votes weeks after Election Day.

Between 1865 and 1877, more than 1,500 Black Americans served in local, state, and federal offices—including 16 in Congress. This unprecedented political participation largely ended after Reconstruction as Jim Crow laws and racial violence suppressed Black voting.

In Shelby County v. Holder, the Supreme Court struck down the Voting Rights Act's preclearance formula, reducing federal oversight of voting laws—including redistricting—and allowing changes to take effect without prior approval.

Eighty-seven percent of Americans want term limits for Congress. So why don't they exist? The Founders debated this in 1787 and chose not to include them, believing elections would be enough. In the 1990s, 23 states tried to make it happen—until the Supreme Court struck them all down in a 5-4 decision.

Ratified between 1865 and 1870 after the conclusion of the war, the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments abolished slavery, guaranteed citizenship and equal protection, and extended voting rights to Black men—transforming the Constitution's definition of liberty and equality.

What’s actually at stake when someone casts their vote in a US election? CNN’s “Election 101” podcast series provides ten episodes summarizing some of the basics of democratic elections. The ins and outs of voting are highlighted in 15-minute episodes on voter registration and voting by mail. Additional segments highlight how the electoral system works, how ballots are counted, the Electoral College, why it takes so long to get election results, and more.

This podcast episode examines the closest attempts in US history to eliminate the Electoral College, focusing on a major 1960s reform push—and why, despite broad support, it ultimately failed.

In 1787, the US Constitution introduced a system built on the separation of powers and individual liberties, including freedom of speech and religion. Though widely influential, its rigidity has made it less of a modern model as countries adopt more adaptable constitutional frameworks.

The creation of the Constitution necessitated numerous compromises to accommodate the diverse interests of the states. The significant compromises included resolutions on debates over representation in Congress and the status of enslaved individuals.

This article breaks down demographic data to show what it means for American elections. According to the latest US Census, the US is growing increasingly diverse. As the population becomes more diverse, so does the electorate.

Amending the Constitution requires substantial and widespread public support. Since 1879, more than 10,000 amendments have been proposed—many repeatedly—ranging from banning flag burning to repealing the income tax. This resource highlights some of the most notable failures.

Defenders of the Electoral College argue it preserves federalism, forces candidates to build broad national coalitions, magnifies victory margins to reduce recount disputes, and limits incentives for voter fraud by containing the impact of contested ballots within individual states.

This article argues that the Electoral College no longer reflects modern democratic norms, disproportionately advantages smaller states, and warrants broader reform and national debate.

The framers created the Electoral College as a compromise between electing the president by popular vote or by Congress. It was meant to balance power between large and small states and to allow elites to intervene if voters chose an unfit candidate.

US presidential elections are not “majority rules” contests. A complex mechanism underpins them, guided by the Electoral College system established by the Constitution. This US government website offers an overview of that system, which apportions “electors” for each state and requires winning presidential candidates to secure at least 270 Electoral votes on election night.

Under Article I, Section 4 of the US Constitution, state legislatures possess the authority to determine how congressional districts are drawn. However, Congress retains the power to alter these rules if it chooses to.

In the American system, known as diffuse judicial review, federal and state courts at every level may assess whether laws comply with the Constitution, and their decisions are ultimately reviewable by the Supreme Court. Many other democracies, by contrast, reserve constitutional review to specialized constitutional courts.

With little federal oversight, Southern states enacted laws effectively reestablishing slavery's economic and social order. These laws, known as the "Black Codes," restricted freed people's movement, labor, and property rights.

This explainer traces how the Founding Fathers designed the Electoral College as a middle ground—balancing fears of direct popular rule against concerns about giving Congress the power to choose the president.

Of nearly 12,000 proposed constitutional amendments, only 27 were ratified. This article highlights radical failed proposals that would have renamed the country, abolished the presidency, capped personal wealth, or fundamentally rewritten how American democracy works.

After multiple states sent competing electoral slates in 1876, Congress formed the Electoral Commission of 1877 to arbitrate the dispute, which ultimately awarded the presidency to Rutherford B. Hayes and prompted later reforms to the electoral count process.

In this 2016 podcast episode, Harvard's Alex Keyssar and UVA's James Ceaser debate why the Electoral College was created, how parties reshaped it, and what reforms—national popular vote, runoffs, district allocation—could replace it.

In this article, Silver weighs the Electoral College's flaws—especially popular-vote inversions—against its advantages, arguing it can limit the effect of surplus votes in heavily one-sided states and encourage broader competition.