A group opposing a ballot question to eliminate abortion as a constitutionally protected right has amassed more than $3 million ahead of the high-stakes referendum that will likely foretell the future of abortion access in Kentucky.

Abortion-rights group Protect Kentucky Access had raised more than $3 million by October 12, according to campaign finance reports filed Wednesday evening. More than $1.25 million of PKA’s money was raised in the last 30 days. The group urging a “no” vote on Constitutional Amendment No. 2, has raised roughly five-times as much as Yes for Life.

PKA’s earnings in 2022 have been buttressed by hefty donations from national groups, including Planned Parenthood and its affiliates, as well as the American Civil Liberties Union. Combined in 2022, those organizations fronted more than $1 million.

A group opposing a ballot question to eliminate abortion as a constitutionally protected right has amassed more than $3 million ahead of the high-stakes referendum that will likely foretell the future of abortion access in Kentucky.

Abortion-rights group Protect Kentucky Access had raised more than $3 million by October 12, according to campaign finance reports filed Wednesday evening. More than $1.25 million of PKA’s money was raised in the last 30 days. The group urging a “no” vote on Constitutional Amendment No. 2, has raised roughly five-times as much as Yes for Life.

PKA’s earnings in 2022 have been buttressed by hefty donations from national groups, including Planned Parenthood and its affiliates, as well as the American Civil Liberties Union. Combined in 2022, those organizations fronted more than $1 million.

The only good news for the Doug Mastriano campaign is that his deficit is down in the single digits.

The latest Trafalgar Group survey of 1,078 likely voters shows Democratic nominee Josh Shapiro with a 52.8 to 43.5 point advantage over the GOP candidate. It is the first time in the last seven polls that the state senator from Franklin County has seen his deficit below 10 points.

Libertarian candidate Matt Hackenburg pulled in 1.3 percent, while two percent remain undecided in a survey with a margin of error of +/- 2.9 points.

Shapiro, the Attorney General of the Commonwealth, showed strong numbers across the demographic board, including more than 15 percentage point advantages among voters 25-34 (39.2), 35-44 (17.8) and 65+ (16.3). He also held a considerable edge among women (17.9) and a smaller advantage among men (9.3).

Marc E. Elias
@marceelias

🚨BREAKING: Ohio GOP legislative leaders will seek US Supreme Court review of OH State Supreme Court's decision striking down state's congressional maps. GOP will invoke radical "independent state legislature" theory currently before SCOTUS in North Carolina case.

Abortion, voting rights, criminal justice, gerrymandering—it’s all on the line in November.

North Carolina voters will soon decide whether their state constitution will be defined by a slim Democratic majority that has broadened civil rights or by a new conservative majority that will narrowly interpret the rights of voters, criminal defendants, and people seeking abortion care.

A recent poll by WRAL in Raleigh suggests that one race is too close to call, though the Republican candidate, Trey Allen, holds a two-point lead. In the other race, the Republican candidate, Richard Dietz, holds a five-point lead, but nearly a third of voters are still undecided. Another poll by a conservative group claims the GOP candidates have a substantial lead, with fewer undecided voters. Early voting begins next week.

Conservative groups in D.C. are also pouring money into the race. A billionaire-backed organization called Fair Courts America has pledged to spend $22 million—a record-breaking sum—to help conservative high court candidates around the country. The Judicial Crisis Network, a dark-money group whose leader has lied about spending in high court races, could funnel money into groups that run ads attacking the Democrats.

In recent years, the North Carolina Supreme Court has cracked down on blatant partisan gerrymandering by the Republican-led legislature.

But the North Carolina Supreme Court races will decide much more than the future of redistricting. Since Democrats took over in 2017, the majority has issued a series of groundbreaking rulings in criminal justice and voting rights cases. Many of these groundbreaking opinions were authored by Justice Anita Earls, a former civil rights attorney elected in 2018 despite the legislature’s attempts to help the Republican incumbent.

In 2020, the justices drastically limited the impact of a bill that repealed the landmark Racial Justice Act (RJA), a law that allowed people on death row to be resentenced if racial bias infected the process. The justices invalidated a provision of the repeal bill that would’ve sent four people back to death row after their sentences had been commuted to life imprisonment. They also ruled that 130 people on death row must get hearings on their racial bias claims under the RJA.

The court has also finally cracked down on racism in jury selection, after decades of inaction and evidence showing that prosecutors routinely struck Black people from jury pools.

Yet all of the North Carolina Supreme Court’s progress in protecting individual rights and addressing discrimination in the criminal justice system could come to a screeching halt next year if voters elect a new Republican majority.

Governor Ron DeSantis has made voting easier in certain Florida counties battered by Hurricane Ian – but only Republican-leaning ones.

DeSantis signed an executive order on Thursday that eases voting rules for about 1 million voters in Lee, Charlotte and Sarasota counties, all areas that Hurricane Ian hit hard and that all reliably vote Republican.

Meanwhile, Orange county, a Democratic-leaning area which experienced historic flooding from the storm, received no voting exceptions, reported the Washington Post.

The accommodations include extended early voting days and the ability for voters to send mail-in ballots from addresses not listed in voting records.

Voting rights groups had previously asked the governor to extend the statewide voting registration deadline, which ended on Tuesday, and to add more early voting days, as well as implement other accommodations.

DeSantis complied – but only for the three Republican counties.

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) currently holds a 4-point lead over Democratic challenger Beto O’Rourke as inflation weighs heavy on voters’ minds ahead of November’s gubernatorial election.

According to a new Marist College poll published Wednesday, 49 percent of registered voters said they’ll support Abbott in the upcoming gubernatorial election, while 45 percent back O’Rourke.

Among those likely to vote in the gubernatorial election, 52 percent of respondents said they’ll support Abbot, while 44 percent offered their support for O’Rourke.

Charlie Crist denounced Gov. Ron DeSantis on Thursday for what he said was mishandling the approach of Hurricane Ian, suggesting that better leadership could have meant fewer deaths from the storm.

“The lapse in leadership was apparent and obvious,” Crist said in a video interview with the South Florida Sun Sentinel and Orlando Sentinel editorial boards. “It’s before the storm hit where true leadership really comes to bear, and it didn’t in this case and it breaks my heart.”

Crist faulted DeSantis for what he said was the “evacuation order issued late for Lee County,” which came a day later than in his home county, Pinellas.

“Why the governor wouldn’t have taken the storm more seriously beforehand? That’s the time when you have the opportunity to save life. That’s the time when you do what is necessary to protect health, safety and welfare of our fellow Floridians, and I think that he missed it there. It is clear in hindsight that he did,” Crist said. “We’ve lost over a hundred Floridians as a result of the storm.”

“I know it’s inconvenient to evacuate but death is a lot more inconvenient and a lot more serious and I think inconvenience does not trump the saving of Floridians’ lives, and so I condemn him on that,” Crist said.

For decades, federal law has forbidden gun owners from scratching out the serial numbers that manufacturers are legally required to place on firearms. The reason is obvious: These serial numbers help state and federal law enforcement trace guns that are used in crimes and identify suspected shooters. Indeed, the only apparent reason anyone would remove a serial number is to avoid becoming a suspect after their gun is used illegally. On Wednesday, however, a federal judge ruled that the law prohibiting alteration of serial numbers violates the Second Amendment. Why? Because serial numbers were virtually nonexistent when the amendment was ratified in 1791, so the government has no power to mandate them today.

This decision in United States v. Price by U.S. District Judge Joseph R. Goodwin, a Bill Clinton appointee, may sound shocking. But it is a perfectly plausible application of the Supreme Court’s June ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen. In that case, Justice Clarence Thomas declared all gun restrictions presumptively unconstitutional if they infringe on “the individual right to armed self-defense.” (The Constitution says nothing about “self-defense,” but Thomas gleaned this right from its penumbra.) A gun restriction may only survive legal scrutiny, the justice declared, if it had an “analogue” in 1791, when the Second Amendment was ratified, or 1868, when it was imposed on the states. The burden falls on the government to prove the existence of a historical analogue.

Thomas’ test has already wreaked havoc in the lower courts. One judge has struck down a Texas law that prohibits 18 to 20-year-olds from carrying a handgun outside the home. People under 21 are significantly more likely to commit gun homicides—but in Bruen, Thomas announced that courts may never consider the real-world, life-saving impact of gun safety laws when gauging their constitutionality. A different Texas judge invalidated a federal law barring individuals from purchasing a handgun while they’re under indictment, even for a violent felony offense. Just last week, another judge struck down New York’s ban on concealed carry in airports, train stations, domestic violence shelters, summer camps, the subway, and other “sensitive locations.” Now Goodwin, who sits in West Virginia, has joined the chorus of lower court judges who feel that Bruen obliges them to strike down longstanding, widely accepted firearm laws.

Goodwin’s conclusion might sound bizarre, but his analysis closely follows Thomas’ test.