Administration’s plan to unlawfully aggregate personal data to enable voter purges ended by court order in a significant voting issues victory. The ruling comes in League of Women Voters v. US Department of Homeland Security, a case brought by the League of Women Voters, League of Women Voters of Virginia, League of Women Voters of Louisiana, League of Women Voters of Texas, and Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC).

The world knows from harsh experience what happens when powerful individuals and groups are allowed unregulated ability to do whatever increases their own power and influence. Data centers are the newest example. This doesn’t mean that they shouldn’t exist. It does mean that their owners must be compelled to be transparent about their plans, build and operate their facilities in ways that do not trample on the lives of their neighbors, and they must pay their own way.

The State

The LLC-based donation structure is becoming more common in politics. And finance campaign experts say it gives donors who can give more a big advantage. Instead of giving just once, the same donors can give again and again through different LLCs. Because each counts as a separate donor, they can legally give far more than the $1,000 limit — multiplying their influence. Additionally, identifying the people behind an LLC can be difficult. That makes it hard for the public to know who is funding candidates since a specific name or easily searchable business isn’t attached to the contribution.

“Transparency matters because you need to be able to see if there’s a direct connection between the dollars that are being spent to keep somebody in office and how they carry out their official duties,” said Lynn Teague, the vice president at South Carolina’s chapter of the League of Women voters.

Op Ed

South Carolina is heading into a year that will shape our direction for a long time. Primaries on June 9 and the general election on November 3 will determine leadership across statewide offices: the people who influence voter access, how citizenship is verified, how families navigate school choice, how bodily autonomy is defined, how income‑tax policy hits household budgets, and how agriculture adjusts to a changing economy.

Across the state, the rooms where these conversations are happening tell their own story. When you are in the room, you can see how someone listens, how they handle a tough question, how they treat people whose identities they perceive as different from their own. You can learn a lot from a handshake—and from the choice not to offer one.