John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act of 2025
Sponsored By: Senator Richard Durbin
Introduced
Summary
This bill would restore and strengthen federal voting-rights protections by rewriting Section 2, creating a practice-based preclearance process for certain election changes, and boosting transparency and enforcement.
Show full summary
- Voters in racial, language-minority, and Tribal communities would gain broader legal standards to challenge discrimination. The bill would add distinct Section 2 tests for vote-dilution, vote-denial, and intentional discrimination and add a retrogression standard that applies to actions taken on or after 2021.
- State and local election officials would face new preclearance and public-notice rules. Covered changes like election methods, redistricting shifts, ID rules, polling-place moves, and voter-list removals would need review before implementation and require pre-election notices 30 days before Federal elections with 48-hour updates.
- The Department of Justice and private citizens would get stronger tools to enforce rights. The Attorney General would centralize observers, extend bilingual protections to 2037, seek preventive relief, issue pre-action information demands, and pursue expanded court remedies.
Bill Overview
Analyzed Economic Effects
8 provisions identified: 4 benefits, 0 costs, 4 mixed.
Criminal penalties to protect voting places
If enacted, the bill would make it a federal crime to willfully stop someone from voting or to damage polling places to interfere with elections. Base penalties would be fines up to $2,500 and/or up to 6 months in jail. If someone is injured or a weapon or fire is used, penalties would rise to fines up to $5,000 and/or up to 1 year in jail. The Attorney General must certify certain federal prosecutions before they proceed.
New tests for voting discrimination
If enacted, this bill would change the law that decides when voting rules discriminate. It would add four tests: vote-dilution, vote-denial or abridgment, intentional discrimination, and retrogression. The retrogression test would apply to actions taken on or after January 1, 2021. Courts would use these tests when reviewing challenged voting rules.
Practice-based preclearance for election changes
If enacted, the bill would create a new preclearance system for specific election changes. States and localities would have to identify listed "covered practices" and not implement them unless a court clears them or the Attorney General does not object within 60 days. Covered practices include some method-of-election changes, boundary shifts that reduce a group's share, new ID or document rules, reductions in multilingual materials, and certain polling-place or list-maintenance changes. The preclearance rules would apply to changes made 60 days after enactment.
New polling-place notice rules and grants
If enacted, jurisdictions would have to post public notice within 48 hours after a voting-rule or polling-place change that differs from rules 180 days before the election. Before the 30th day before a federal election, they would publish details for each polling place: address, accessibility, number of machines, poll-worker counts, and hours. Counties, cities, and school districts with more than 10,000 people must follow these rules. The Attorney General would also make yearly grants to very small localities (10,000 people or less) to help them meet notice duties.
Stronger DOJ tools and private relief options
If enacted, the Attorney General could issue pre-action demands for documents and written answers before suing. Demands must include a sworn certificate and give at least 20 days to respond. The Attorney General or an aggrieved person could also seek preventive court relief to block likely vote-denying rules, and the bill updates attorney-fee rules and standards for preliminary injunctions.
Which places must get preclearance
If enacted, the bill would set numeric triggers for which States or localities must use preclearance. A State would be covered if it had 15 or more voting-rights violations in the last 25 years, or 10 or more including at least one committed by the State. A political subdivision would be covered if it had 3 or more violations in the last 25 years. Coverage would begin January 1 of the year the trigger is met and last 10 years.
Attorney General control of observers
If enacted, the Attorney General would take operational control of assigning and paying federal election observers. Observers could be sent when the Attorney General believes they are needed to enforce voting protections, including meritorious bilingual-voting complaints. The Office of Personnel Management could still help, but only with the Attorney General's consent.
Easier bailout and broader court reach
If enacted, the bill would make it easier for governments to seek a bailout (a declaratory judgment) and let a plaintiff ask the Attorney General to consent to entry of bailout judgments. It would also broaden federal courts' language so they can keep jurisdiction over actions alleging violations of this Act or federal voting laws, measured at the time a case begins.
Sponsors & CoSponsors
Sponsor
Richard Durbin
IL • D
Cosponsors
Raphael Warnock
GA • D
Sponsored 7/29/2025
Richard Blumenthal
CT • D
Sponsored 7/29/2025
Charles Schumer
NY • D
Sponsored 7/29/2025
Cory Booker
NJ • D
Sponsored 7/29/2025
Jeanne Shaheen
NH • D
Sponsored 7/29/2025
Sheldon Whitehouse
RI • D
Sponsored 7/29/2025
Edward Markey
MA • D
Sponsored 7/29/2025
John Hickenlooper
CO • D
Sponsored 7/29/2025
Jacky Rosen
NV • D
Sponsored 7/29/2025
John Fetterman
PA • D
Sponsored 7/29/2025
Alex Padilla
CA • D
Sponsored 7/29/2025
Chris Van Hollen
MD • D
Sponsored 7/29/2025
Michael Bennet
CO • D
Sponsored 7/29/2025
Adam Schiff
CA • D
Sponsored 7/29/2025
Bernie Sanders
VT • I
Sponsored 7/29/2025
Martin Heinrich
NM • D
Sponsored 7/29/2025
John Reed
RI • D
Sponsored 7/29/2025
Andy Kim
NJ • D
Sponsored 7/29/2025
Peter Welch
VT • D
Sponsored 7/29/2025
Ron Wyden
OR • D
Sponsored 7/29/2025
Christopher Coons
DE • D
Sponsored 7/29/2025
Mazie Hirono
HI • D
Sponsored 7/29/2025
Kirsten Gillibrand
NY • D
Sponsored 7/29/2025
Elizabeth Warren
MA • D
Sponsored 7/29/2025
Tammy Baldwin
WI • D
Sponsored 7/29/2025
Maggie Hassan
NH • D
Sponsored 7/29/2025
Ruben Gallego
AZ • D
Sponsored 7/29/2025
Catherine Cortez Masto
NV • D
Sponsored 7/29/2025
Timothy Kaine
VA • D
Sponsored 7/29/2025
Elissa Slotkin
MI • D
Sponsored 7/29/2025
Mark Warner
VA • D
Sponsored 7/29/2025
Patty Murray
WA • D
Sponsored 7/29/2025
Jon Ossoff
GA • D
Sponsored 7/29/2025
Mark Kelly
AZ • D
Sponsored 7/29/2025
Lisa Blunt Rochester
DE • D
Sponsored 7/29/2025
Maria Cantwell
WA • D
Sponsored 7/29/2025
Amy Klobuchar
MN • D
Sponsored 7/29/2025
Gary Peters
MI • D
Sponsored 7/29/2025
Christopher Murphy
CT • D
Sponsored 7/29/2025
Sen. Luján, Ben Ray [D-NM]
NM • D
Sponsored 7/29/2025
Tina Smith
MN • D
Sponsored 7/29/2025
Angus King
ME • I
Sponsored 7/29/2025
Jeff Merkley
OR • D
Sponsored 7/29/2025
Tammy Duckworth
IL • D
Sponsored 7/29/2025
Brian Schatz
HI • D
Sponsored 7/29/2025
Angela Alsobrooks
MD • D
Sponsored 7/29/2025
Roll Call Votes
No roll call votes available for this bill.
View on Congress.govRelated Bills
S1503 — Equality Act
Treat sexual orientation and gender identity as forms of sex discrimination across federal law. The bill would explicitly add sexual orientation and gender identity to federal sex‑discrimination protections and apply those rules across many statutes and programs.
S2150 — Women’s Health Protection Act of 2025
Guarantee nationwide protections for a person's right to obtain abortion services and a provider's right to deliver them. The Women's Health Protection Act of 2025 would create a federal rule that stops laws and rules that single out abortion or place heavier burdens on abortion than on similar medical procedures. It defines key terms, protects pre-viability care, allows post-viability care to protect life or health, and explicitly protects interstate travel and the movement of medicines, equipment, patients, and providers. - Families and patients: Would protect access to abortion before viability and allow post-viability care when needed to protect life or health. It would bar medically unnecessary in-person visit rules and stop forced disclosure of why a patient seeks care. - Health care providers: Would protect providers' ability to give abortion care including by telemedicine and across state lines, and would forbid facility, staffing, testing, or disclosure requirements that are not required for similar procedures. - States and interstate commerce: Would preempt conflicting state laws and recognize a right to travel and to assist others in getting reproductive health services across state lines. - Courts and enforcement: Would let the Attorney General sue and would create a private right of action so patients and providers can seek injunctive relief and attorney's fees. It would limit state sovereign immunity where federal law allows challenges.
S1115 — Paycheck Fairness Act
Stronger enforcement against sex-based wage discrimination. This bill would tighten legal remedies, expand pay-data reporting, and fund training and grants to help close persistent pay gaps between men and women. - Workers: Would expand protections so employees can discuss pay without retaliation and pursue compensatory and, for willful misconduct, punitive damages. It also narrows the employer "bona fide factor" defense so pay differences must be job-related and business-necessary. - Employers: Private firms with 100 or more employees would face new pay-data reporting requirements by sex, race, and ethnicity and public disclosure of aggregated results by industry, occupation, and metro area. - Federal contractors and agencies: The Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs would restart and expand contractor pay surveys and must annually select not less than half of nonconstruction contractor establishments to report. The Bureau of Labor Statistics would continue tracking women in its employment survey. - Training, grants, and outreach: The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and OFCCP must receive training funded by appropriations. A new competitive Negotiation Skills Training grant program would fund entities to teach pay negotiation and report on outcomes.
S3214 — Background Check Expansion Act
Would require background checks for most private firearm transfers by routing them through licensed dealers. This bill would create a new transfer framework that makes it unlawful for two unlicensed people to complete a firearm transfer without a licensed importer, manufacturer, or dealer first taking possession to run the check and comply with federal transfer rules. - Private sellers and buyers would have to route most sales through a licensed importer, manufacturer, or dealer who would take possession to run the background check and follow all transfer requirements. - Licensed importers, manufacturers, and dealers would be required to provide a notice of the prohibition and collect a certification on a form prescribed by the Attorney General before completing a transfer. - Close family and estate transfers would be exempt, including transfers between spouses, domestic partners, parents and children, siblings, aunts or uncles and nieces or nephews, and grandparents and grandchildren, and transfers by operation of law to executors or trustees. - Temporary and specific transfers would be exempt in narrowly defined situations. These include short-term transfers to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm, transfers approved under the tax code, and transfers that occur only at a shooting range or for hunting, trapping, or fishing while the transferor is present and has no reason to believe the transferee is prohibited. - Transfers to law enforcement officers, armed private security professionals acting within official duties, and members of the Armed Forces acting in their official capacity would be exempt. - The bill's amendments would take effect 180 days after enactment.
S2837 — Protect America’s Workforce Act
Protect federal employees' collective bargaining rights. This bill would nullify Executive Orders 14251 and 14343 that exclude certain workers from federal labor-management programs, bar any federal funds from carrying them out, and preserve collective bargaining agreements in effect on March 26, 2025 through their stated terms. - Federal employees and unions: Keeps contracts that existed on March 26, 2025 in force until their agreed expiration, protecting negotiated pay and working conditions. - Federal agencies: Prevents agencies from obligating or spending federal funds to implement the two Executive Orders, blocking efforts to remove those exclusions.
S2556 — Protecting Health Care and Lowering Costs Act
Permanently expands premium tax credits and removes the 400% cap. This bill would make enhanced premium subsidies permanent with a new sliding scale of required premium shares by income and would repeal Subtitle B of Title VII to restore the prior health-related framework. - Households: Families and individuals above 400% of the federal poverty line could qualify for premium tax credits and would face premium caps up to 8.5% of income. - Health law framework: Repeals Subtitle B of Title VII and directs that any law or regulation referenced there apply as if that subtitle had not been enacted, restoring the earlier health-related rules. - Timing: The changes would apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2025.
Take It Personal
Get Your Personalized Policy View
Create a free account to save research, track policy impacts, and unlock your personalized versions of these pages.
Already have an account? Sign in