Connect with us

Black Press

Trump Lost. Vote Suppression Won. Here are the numbers…

Published

on

by Greg Palast

Trump lost. That is, if all legal voters were allowed to vote, if all legal ballots were counted, Trump would have lost the states of Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Georgia. Vice-President Kamala Harris would have won the Presidency with 286 electoral votes.

And, if not for the mass purge of voters of color, if not for the mass disqualification of provisional and mail-in ballots, if not for the new mass “vigilante” challenges in swing states, Harris would have gained at least another 3,565,000 votes, topping Trump’s official popular vote tally by 1.2 million.

Stay with me and I’ll give you the means, methods and, most important, the key calculations.

But if you’re expecting a sexy story about Elon Musk messing with vote-counting software from outer space, sorry, you won’t get that here.

As in Bush v. Gore in 2000, and in too many other miscarriages of Democracy, this election was determined by good old “vote suppression,” the polite term we use for shafting people of color out of their ballot. We used to call it Jim Crow.

Here are key numbers:

  • 4,776,706 voters were wrongly purged from voter rolls according to US Elections Assistance Commission data.
  • By August of 2024, for the first time since 1946, self-proclaimed “vigilante” voter-fraud hunters challenged the rights of 317,886 voters. The NAACP of Georgia estimates that by Election Day, the challenges exceeded 200,000 in Georgia alone.
  • No less than 2,121,000 mail-in ballots were disqualified for minor clerical errors (e.g. postage due).
  • At least 585,000 ballots cast in-precinct were also disqualified.
  • 1,216,000 “provisional” ballots were rejected, not counted.
  • 3.24 million new registrations were rejected or not entered on the rolls in time to vote.

If the purges, challenges and ballot rejections were random, it wouldn’t matter. It’s anything but random. For example, an audit by the State of Washington found that a Black voter was 400% more likely than a white voter to have their mail-in ballot rejected. Rejection of Black in-person votes, according to a US Civil Rights Commission study in Florida, ran 14.3% or one in seven ballots cast.

There are also the uncountable effects of the explosive growth of voter intimidation tactics including the bomb threats that closed 31 polling stations in Atlanta on Election Day.

America’s Nasty Little Secret

The nasty little secret of American democracy is that we don’t count all the votes. Nor let every citizen vote.

In 2024, especially, after an avalanche of new not-going-to-let-you-vote laws passed in almost every red state, the number of citizens Jim Crow’d out of their vote soared into the millions. According to the Brennan Center for Justice, since the 2020 election, “At least 30 states enacted 78 restrictive laws” to blockade voting. The race-targeted laws ran the gamut from shuttering drop boxes in Black-majority cities to, for the first time, allowing non-government self-appointed “vote fraud vigilantes” to challenge voters by the hundreds of thousands.

Throughout election seasons, The New York Times and NPR and establishment media write stories and editorials decrying vote suppression tactics, from new ID requirements to new restrictions on mail-in voting. But, notably, the mainstream press never, ever, not once, will say that these ugly racist attacks on voters changed the outcome of an election.

Question: If these vote suppression laws — notorious example: Georgia’s SB 202 — had no effect on election outcomes, then why did GOP legislators fight so hard to pass these laws? The answer is clear on the Brennan Center’s map of states that passed restrictive laws. It’s pretty much Trump’s victory map.

America Goes Postal

Let’s look at just one vote suppression operation in action.

In 2020, during the pandemic, America went postal. More than 43% of us voted by mail.

But it wasn’t easy. Harris County, Texas, home of Houston, tried to mail out ballots during the COVID epidemic on the grounds that voters shouldn’t die waiting in lines at polling stations. But then, the state’s Republican Attorney General Ken Paxton stopped this life-saving measure.

Why wouldn’t this GOP official let Houstonians vote safely? Maybe it’s because Houston has the largest number of Black voters of any city in America. Indeed, on Steve Bannon’s podcast, Paxton proudly stated, “Had we not done that [stopped Houston from sending out ballots], Donald Trump would’ve lost the election” in Texas. Texas!

Before the 2024 election, prompted by Trump’s evidence-free attack on mail-in ballots as inherently fraudulent, 22 states, according to the Brennan Center, imposed “38 new restrictions on the ability to vote absentee that were not in place in 2020…likely to most affect or already have disproportionately affected voters of color.” You’re shocked, right?

Texas’ requirement to add ID numbers to an absentee ballot caused the rejection rate to jump from 1% to 12%.

So, here’s the question we need to ask. If restrictions on mail-in balloting swung Texas to Trump, how did all these new restrictions affect the outcome of the vote in other states?

In 2020, an NPR study found the mail-in ballot rejection rate hit 13.8% during the Democratic primaries—a loss of one in seven ballots.

Take Georgia, where the Palast Investigative Fund spent months in on-the-ground investigations.

Here are photos of a Georgia voter, career military officer and Pentagon advisor Major Gamaliel Turner (Ret), demonstrating for young voters how to fill out an absentee ballot, emphasizing that it must be mailed in promptly. He did, seven days before the deadline. But we only recently learned that Georgia officials disqualified his ballot as received too late.

In 2008, even before the majority of Democrats began voting by mail, when absentee balloting was much rarer, the federal government reported 488,136 mail-in ballots were rejected, almost all on picayune grounds (i.e. middle initial on signature missing etc.). An MIT study put the number of rejected mail-in ballots at 2.9%.

That’s the low-end of MIT’s estimate of mail-in ballots tossed out. Charles Stewart, Distinguished Professor of Political Science, author of the report, notes mail-in ballots requested and never received nor returned could raise the total mail-in ballot loss rate to 21%.

For 2024, that would total 14.1 million ballots that, effectively, vanished from the count.

The “failure to return” ballot was exacerbated in this election by the steep cut in ballot drop boxes, a method favored by urban (read, “Democratic”) voters. Black voters in Atlanta used ballot drop boxes extensively because they feared, with good reason, relying on the Post Office [see Major Turner’s story above].

In response, the Republican Governor of Georgia, Brian Kemp, signed SB 202 which slashed the number of drop boxes by 75% only in Black-majority counties and locked them away at night. These moves slashed mail-in and drop box balloting, used by the majority of Democrats in 2020, by nearly 90% in the 2024 race.

Even if deemed “on time,” ballots still face rejection. Marietta, Georgia, first-time voter Andrian Consonery Jr. told me his mail-in ballot was rejected because his signature supposedly didn’t match that on his registration. (I needn’t add, Consonery is Black.) In effect, Consonery was accused of forgery — a federal crime — not by the FBI but by self-appointed amateur sleuths. This challenge to mail-in ballots, part of a right-wing campaign, has gone viral.

In 2020, the federal government reported that 157,477 ballots were rejected for supposedly “mis-matched” signatures. That’s quite a crime wave — but without criminals.

And that’s before we get to the dozens of other attacks on voting that were freshly minted for the 2024 election, attacks aimed at voters of color.

The crucial statistic is that not everyone’s ballot gets disqualified. One study done for the United States Civil Rights Commission found that a Black person, such as Maj. Turner, will be 900% more likely to have their mail-in or in-person ballot disqualified than a white voter.

Now, let’s do some arithmetic. If we take the lowest end of the MIT ballot rejection rate, and only a tenth of the “lost” ballot rate, and then apply it to the number of mail-in and drop-box ballots, we can conservatively estimate that 2,121,000 mail-in votes went into the electoral dumpster.

Whose ballots? Democrats are 51% more likely than Republicans to vote by mail; and, given the racial disparity in ballot rejections, Trump’s swing-state margins begin to look shaky.

The KKK Plan and the New Vigilantes

In 2020, the Palast Investigative Fund uncovered a whole new way to bring Jim Crow back to life: challenges to a citizen’s right to vote by a posse of self-proclaimed vote-fraud hunters.

Four years ago, the GOP took this new suppression method out for a test ride in Georgia when 88 Republican operatives — remember, these are not government officials — challenged the rights of over 180,000 Georgians to have their ballots counted. These vigilantes based their scheme on the program originally used by the Ku Klux Klan in 1946.

One challenged voter: Major Turner, the same voter whose mail-in ballot was disqualified in a later election.

In 2020, the Major’s ballot was challenged by the county Chairman of the Republican Party in Southern Georgia, Alton Russell. (Russell likes to dress up as infamous vigilante Doc Holliday, with a loaded six-gun in a holster.) In a (polite) confrontation we filmed between the Major and Russell, the GOP honcho admitted he had no evidence that Maj. Turner, nor any of the 4,000 others he challenged, should be denied the right to have their ballots counted.

Note: The Palast Fund contacted a sample of 800 of these challenged voters and found that, overwhelmingly, they were Americans of color.

In 2020, this KKK plan, adopted by the Trump organization, proved its value. In that election, Trump almost won Georgia, falling short by just 11,779 votes — only because local elections officials rejected most of the challenges. But for 2024, the Georgia’s Republican-controlled legislature changed the law to make it very difficult for officials to deny the challenges.

That emboldened the Trump-supported organization True the Vote to roll out the challenge to every swing state. In 2024, True the Vote signed up over 40,000 volunteer vigilantes. The organization crowed proudly that, by August of 2024, they’d already challenged a mind-blowing 317,886 voters in dozens of states. By Election Day this November, True the Vote projected it would have challenged over two million voters. In addition, Trump’s lawyer, Cleta Mitchell, founded Eagle AI to challenge hundreds of thousands more including in swing state Pennsylvania.

How many voters ultimately lost their ballots? Almost all voting officials we’ve contacted have refused to answer.

Placebo Ballots

Those voters who’d been challenged but mailed in their ballot would be unlikely to know their vote had been lost. Others who showed up in person at a poll would be told they could not vote on a regular ballot. These voters were sent away or forced to vote on a “provisional” ballot.

If you’ve been challenged or find you’ve been purged off the registration rolls, you’ll be offered one of these provisional ballots, paper ballots you place in a special envelope. Typically, you’ll be promised your registration will be checked and then your ballot will be counted. Bullshit. If you’re challenged, unless you personally contact or go into your county clerk’s office with ID and proof of address, your ballot goes into the electoral dumpster.

A better name for a “provisional” ballot would be “placebo” ballot. You think you’ve voted, but chances are, you did not, that is, your ballot wasn’t counted.

Here’s an ugly number: According to the US Elections Assistance Commission (EAC), in 2016, when 2.5 million provisional ballots were cast, a breathtaking 42.3% were never counted. Think about that. Over a million Americans lost their vote — though, notably, not one was charged attempting to vote illegally. And that was in 2016, before the vigilante challenges and before millions more had been purged from the rolls leading up to the 2024 election.

And here’s the statistic that matters most. Black, Hispanic or Asian-American voters are 300% more likely than white voters to be shunted to a “placebo” provisional ballot.

The Great Purge and the Poison Postcard

The polite term in government agencies is, “List Maintenance.” It’s best known as The Purge — when voters’ registrations are wiped off the rolls. The EAC keeps track of The Purge. It’s a big business. For example, before the 2022 election, when the data was last available, swing state North Carolina wiped 392,851 voters off the rolls.

The majority of removals were based on questionable, indeed, shockingly faulty information that a voter had moved their residence. I’m not talking about the 4.9 million voters purged because they’re dead, or eight million others whose residential move could be verified, nor those serving time in prison nor those ruled too crazy to vote.

I’m talking about a trick that has been perfected by politicians of both parties to eliminate voters of the wrong persuasion: the Poison Postcard. Here’s how it works: Targeted voters are mailed postcards by state elections officials. (Let’s remember, state voting chiefs, “Secretaries of State,” are almost to a one partisan hacks.) Voters who don’t sign and return the cards, which look like junk mail, will be purged.

The Poison Postcard response rate is close to nothing. In Arizona, according to the EAC, just one in ten postcards are returned. And in Georgia, the vote-saving response is barely above 1%. And that’s the way our partisan voting officials like it.

Were the millions of Americans purged before the 2024 election all fraudsters who should lose their right to vote? Direct marketing expert Mark Swedlund told us, “This only means that most people, especially young people, the poor and voters of color, simply ignore junk mail.”

With the help of Swedlund and the same experts used by Amazon — and believe me, Amazon knows exactly where you live — we took a deep dive into two states’ purge operations for the ACLU.

The state of Georgia had purged hundreds of thousands from the voter rolls on grounds they’d moved from their voting addresses. Our experts, going name by name through Georgia’s purge list, working from special data provided us by the US Postal Service, identified 198,351 Georgians who had been purged for moving had, in fact, not moved an inch from their legal voting address. The state’s only evidence these 198,351 voters had moved? They failed to return the Poison Postcard.

In 2020, I testified in federal court for the NAACP and RainbowPUSH, presenting our expert findings to get those voters, overweighted with minorities and young Georgians, back on the rolls. Unfortunately, the Trump’d-up court system now gives huge deference to a state’s voting operations, a trend which first took off in 2013 when the US Supreme Court defenestrated the Voting Rights Act.

The results have been devastating. According to the EAC data, before the 2024 election, 4,776,706 registrants were removed nationwide simply because they failed to return the postcard.

Also in 2020, the Palast Investigative Fund produced a technical report for Black Voters Matter Fund on a proposed purge of 153,779 voters in Wisconsin, a plan pushed by Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty, a group financed by right-wing billionaires. For Black Voters Matter, we brought back our team of location experts who proved, name by name, that the proposed purge was wildly riddled with errors.

Notably, we found that the purged was aimed almost exclusively at African-Americans in Milwaukee and at students in Madison. The non-partisan Elections Board agreed with us, allowing those voters to cast ballots, with the result that Biden squeaked by Trump in Wisconsin by 20,682 votes. (Note: It was not our intention to elect Biden, but to allow the voters, not some Purge’n General, to pick our President.)

Unfortunately, before the 2024 election, the Poison Postcard Purge accelerated. This time, a new Elections Board in Wisconsin (10 electoral votes) decided to use the same discredited purge list to knock off 166,433 voters which, this time, we could not stop. Kamala Harris lost that state by just 29,397 votes. In Pennsylvania (19 electoral votes), the Poison Postcards wiped out 360,132 voters, three times Trump’s victory margin.

And before the vote this year, Georgia ramped up the purge, targeting an astonishing 875,000 voters, earning it the #1 ranking for “election integrity” by the ultra-right-wing Heritage Foundation.

I saw the purge in action in Savannah, Georgia, this October, where 900 Savannah voters, most of them Black, were challenged by one single “vigilante,” according to voting expert Carry Smith. Smith, who wrote her doctoral thesis on wrongful purges in Georgia, was herself on the hit list.

And more

We haven’t even touched on other ways that voters of color, college students and urban voters have come under attack. These include the rejection of new registrations and rejection of in-person votes as “spoiled” (i.e. rejected as unreadable), costing, according to the EAC, more than a million votes — rejections which our 25 years of investigations have found are way overweighted against the Democratic demographic.

After the 2012 election, I was able to calculate, with cold certainty, that 2,383,587 new voters had their registrations rejected; 488,136 legitimate absentee ballots were disqualified, and so on. In that election, a total of 5,901,814 citizens were blocked from voting or had their ballots disqualified. These stats were based on the hard data from the EAC which gathers detailed reports from the states.

Today, with new, sophisticated, and well-financed vote suppression operations, the number of voters purged and ballots disqualified are clearly far higher than the suppression count of 2012. Unfortunately, the EAC won’t release data, if it does at all, for at least a year. We’ve put in Open Records requests to the states, but today’s officials are stonewalling and slow-walking our requests for the data. In no other democracy are the vote totals — or, to be clear, the uncounted ballot totals — a state secret.

America deserves an answer to this question: Excluding a boost from Jim Crow vote suppression games, did Donald Trump win?

From the shockingly huge numbers we’ve discussed here of provisional and mail-in ballots disqualified, the postcard purge operation, the vigilante challenges and so on, we can say, with reasonable certainty, Trump lost — that is, would have lost both the Electoral College and popular vote totals absent suppression.

By how much?

For those who can’t sleep without my best estimate, let me apply the most conservative methodology possible, as I would do in a government investigation.

I’ve updated the 2012 suppression numbers with the newest available data. Not surprisingly, the suppression number has soared, in part because the number of voters has increased by 41.3 million since 2012. But principally, the votes “lost” also zoomed upward because of the massive increase in mail-in balloting by Democrats since 2012, and crucially, the effect of new Jim Crow voting restrictions. Given a minimum two-to-one racial and partisan disparity in voters purged and ballots disqualified, the 2024 “suppression factor” is no less than 4.596% of the total vote.

Those familiar with data mining will note that there is some double-counting in the 9 million voters and their ballots disqualified that I cited at the top of the article. In addition, we must recognize that many voters caught up in the purges and challenges would have cast their ballot for Trump. Therefore, I’ve conservatively cut in half the low end of the range of the calculation of votes suppressed to 2.3% to isolate the effect on Trump’s official victory margin.

In other words, vote suppression cost Kamala Harris no less than 3,565,000 votes. Harris would have topped Trump’s official total by 1.2 million. Most important, this 2.3% suppression factor undoubtedly cost Harris the states of Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Georgia. If not for the wholesale attack on votes and voters, Harris would have won the election with 286 Electoral votes.

Tech note from a numbers guy — and Martin Luther King

Until the Elections Assistance Commission gets updated figures from the states next year (and, under Trump, I doubt we will ever get those numbers), 3,565,000 votes lost to Harris is the estimate I would present in my role as a forensic expert in a courtroom as the lowest conceivable suppression factor.

I rarely make a big deal about my own credentials but, since the election, the Web has been flooded by amateur, arithmetic-defying speculation about computer hacking and other unsupported twaddle. Best to stick to hard, verifiable data. And that’s what I do.

For two decades, I was a forensic economist for government agencies including the US Justice Department; taught statistics at Indiana University; provided expert calculations of vote suppression for the ACLU, NAACP, and RainbowPUSH and won the Global Editors Award for my data journalism on vote suppression measurements for reports done for Al Jazeera, BBC, Rolling Stone and The Guardian. The numbers you get here are exactly what I’d present to a Federal court. In other words, kids, don’t do this at home…calculating the “un-count” requires expertise.

I make this point for another reason: The theory that “Elon Musk messed with the voting machines” is, unconsciously, unintentionally racist. With few exceptions, these silly speculations come from those who simply ignore not just the millions of votes officially reported as suppressed, their theories also ignore the horrifically painful experience of Black people turned away from the polls.

Here is a photo of Jessica Lawrence in tears, moments after her 92-year-old grandmother was tossed out of an Atlanta polling station, into a storm, because she’d been wrongfully purged. Any speculation about the nefarious cause of Trump’s must not leave out Jessica’s grandma nor the millions of other citizens of color who were wrongly barred from their ballot.

Jessica Lawrence at an Atlanta polling station just after her 92-year-old grandmother was denied a ballot. (Photo: David Ambrose for the Palast Investigative Fund, 2018.) See Ms. Jordan and Maj. Turner in the film, Vigilantes Inc: America’s New Vote Suppression Hitmen, available without charge on YouTube.

Now here’s the good news

We saw that in 2020 when, despite extreme, even felonious actions by Trump supporters to block, challenge and disqualify voters and ballots, the theft by suppression was defeated.

That was the work of voting rights groups challenging these attacks. The work was done in the courts and, more important, in the precincts, re-registering the purged, challenging the challenges, “curing” disqualified ballots.

The road is long but victory is certain. After the 2016 election, the Palast team uncovered a cruel, racist purge program called, “Interstate Crosscheck” that cost nearly a million voters, overwhelmingly minorities, their rights. This motivated the Rev. Jesse Jackson to launch a campaign that successfully shut down Crosscheck. Unquestionably, Joe Biden could not have won in 2020 without the Reverend saving literally hundreds of thousands of votes. The point is, they can’t suppress all the votes all the time.

In other words, Democracy can win, despite the 2.3% suppression headwind.

And that’s our job as Americans: to end the purges, the vigilante challenges, the ballot rejections and the attitude that this is all somehow OK.

Martin Luther King gave us our marching orders in 1965, in words just as important today.

“Let us march on ballot boxes, march on ballot boxes until race-baiters disappear from the political arena. I want to say to the people of America and the nations of the world, that we are not about to turn around. We are on the move now.”

Greg Palast is a forensic economist and data journalist Palast covered vote suppression for The Guardian, BBC Television and Rolling Stone. He is the author of New York Times bestsellers on the topic including The Best Democracy Money Can Buy.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Comments

Black History

MHU Commemorates ASCORE and Anniversary of Desegregation

THE URBAN NEWS — UNC Asheville and Mars Hill University are collaborating to host a series of commemorative events marking the 65th anniversary of their desegregation. The programming honors Etta Mae Whitner Patterson and Oralene Anderson Graves Simmons, two former members of the Asheville Student Committee on Racial Equality (ASCORE) who became the first Black students at their respective institutions in 1961.

Published

on

Oralene Simmons (left) and Etta Whitner Patterson, two women who helped change the course of higher education in Western North Carolina.
Oralene Simmons (left) and Etta Whitner Patterson, two women who helped change the course of higher education in Western North Carolina.

A week of events at UNC Asheville, Mars Hill University, and downtown Asheville.

In 1961, two young women broke the color barrier to become the first African American students at two Western North Carolina colleges: Etta Mae Whitner Patterson at UNC Asheville and Oralene Anderson Graves Simmons at Mars Hill University (then Mars Hill College).

Both women were students at Asheville’s Stephens-Lee High School, where they were members of the Asheville Student Committee on Racial Equality (ASCORE). Through nonviolent protest, ASCORE led efforts to desegregate many Asheville stores and businesses.

Patterson and Simmons, who later founded the Martin Luther King Jr. Association of Asheville and Buncombe County, have since received honorary doctorates from their alma maters in recognition of their achievements and lifelong service to their communities.

To commemorate ASCORE, honor the leadership of Etta Patterson and Oralene Simmons, and mark the 65th anniversary of the desegregation of UNC Asheville and Mars Hill University, UNC Asheville’s Department of History and Mars Hill University’s Liston B. Ramsey Center for Appalachian Studies invite the public to attend “Stories of ASCORE: Lessons in Courage, Desegregation, and Community Activism.”

The program will feature two panel discussions with Drs. Patterson and Simmons, along with other former members of ASCORE. Panelists will discuss how their experiences integrating Asheville’s businesses and institutions prepared them for their college careers, professional lives, and continued community activism.

The first panel discussion will take place at 6 p.m. on Tuesday, November 10, 2026, in the Blue Ridge Room of Highsmith Union at UNC Asheville. The event will feature a presentation by Dr. Patterson and a panel discussion with Dr. Simmons, Marvin Chambers, Jesse Ray, and Al Whitesides. The panel will be moderated by Deborah Miles, retired director of the former UNC Asheville Center for Diversity Education.

This event is sponsored by UNC Asheville’s Department of History and Africana Studies Program, with generous support from King and Pam Prather. A free visitor parking permit is required for the UNC Asheville event. Please visit the university’s parking website for instructions on obtaining a permit for the evening’s program.

The second panel discussion will take place at 5 p.m. on Thursday, November 12, 2026, in the Tony and Terry Floyd Conference Center in the Mars Hill University Campus Center. The event will feature Dr. Simmons, Annette Coleman, and Elizabeth Colton. The panel will be moderated by Jonathan McCoy, professor of history at Mars Hill University.

This event is sponsored by the Liston B. Ramsey Center for Appalachian Studies, with generous support from the university’s Provost’s Office.

In addition, at 12 noon on Wednesday, November 11, 2026, in Pack Square in downtown Asheville, Mayor Esther Manheimer and the Buncombe County Commission Chair will proclaim ASCORE Day and present honors to Etta Patterson and Oralene Simmons. Holly Jones of the North Carolina Governor’s Office will also participate in the ceremony.

For more information, contact Leila Weinstein at Mars Hill University ([email protected]) or Ellen Holmes Pearson at UNC Asheville ([email protected]).

Based on reporting by The Urban News.



Continue Reading

Black History

HBCU Love: Spelman’s Dr. Letitia Plummer Makes History as Harris County’s First Black Elected County Judge

TEXAS METRO NEWS — Former Houston City Council member Dr. Letitia Plummer has made history as the first Black person elected to serve as the Harris County Judge. The Spelman College alumna defeated Republican Orlando Sanchez in the general election for Texas’ most populous county, receiving approximately 62% of the vote.

Published

on

HBCU Love: Spelman’s Dr. Letitia Plummer Makes History as Harris County’s First Black Elected County Judge

Letitia Plummer is the next Harris County judge, and the Spelman College alumna made history in Texas’ most populous county. On Tuesday night, the former Houston City Council member defeated Republican Orlando Sanchez. As a result, she becomes the first African American elected to lead Harris County.

Early unofficial results showed Plummer with about 62% of the vote to Sanchez’s 38%. Shortly after 9 p.m., Sanchez called Plummer to concede. He then asked his supporters to back her once she takes office.

The win also makes her the first Muslim elected to the post. According to the Houston Chronicle, that makes her the highest-ranking Muslim executive official in Texas history.

A Historic Night in Houston

Plummer succeeds Lina Hidalgo, who chose not to seek another term. Now, a Spelman woman takes over the top job in a county of nearly 5 million people.

ADVERTISEMENT

In Texas, the county judge is not a courtroom role. Instead, the job leads the Commissioners Court, which runs the county’s budget, roads, flood control and public health. So the seat carries real power over daily life in the Houston region.

The general election was never especially close. However, the road to November was brutal. In the March 3 primary, Plummer finished second behind former Houston Mayor Annise Parker. Parker took about 47% to Plummer’s 37%, sending the race to a runoff.

Then Plummer flipped the script. On May 26, she beat Parker in the runoff with about 51% of the vote. From there, she turned to Sanchez and never looked back. Houston Public Media has full coverage of election night.

Letitia Plummer’s Road From Linkwood to Harris County Judge

Plummer grew up in Linkwood, a neighborhood south of Brays Bayou near Buffalo Speedway. Her family history runs deep in Houston. Her grandfather was a Tuskegee Airman flight instructor. After the war, he became the first African American investigator for the Harris County district attorney.

ADVERTISEMENT

Her father, Matthew Plummer Jr., studied dentistry at Harvard. Later, he served in the Peace Corps, where he met her mother in Africa. Her mother brought Yemeni and Indian roots to the family. As a result, Plummer grew up in a multicultural household that shaped her outlook.

As a teen, she attended what is now DeBakey High School for Health Professions. Then she headed to Atlanta for Spelman. There, she joined Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority, Inc.

After Spelman, she came home to Texas for dental school at Baylor College of Dentistry. Like her father, she became a dentist. She went on to own dental practices in the Houston area, including in Pearland.

From Dental Chair to City Hall

Plummer’s political career started with a 2018 run for Congress. She made the Democratic runoff in Texas’ 22nd District but lost to Sri Preston Kulkarni. Still, the campaign put her on the map.

A year later, she won Houston City Council At-Large Position 4. She took office in January 2020. In doing so, she became the first Muslim woman elected to the Council.

On the Council, she focused on police reform, food deserts and apartment inspections. She also chaired the Government Operations Committee. Notably, fellow Spelman alumna Carolyn Evans-Shabazz served alongside her on the Council.

In 2025, she launched her campaign for county judge. Then she timed her exit from the Council so the city could fill her seat during a regular election. That move saved Houston the cost of a standalone special election.

What She Ran On

Plummer pitched herself as a unifier for a Commissioners Court that has often split along party lines. She promised to build stronger working relationships among its members.

She also called for better county services and changes to the county’s Flock camera contract. In addition, she pushed back on state leaders for exerting authority over Harris County.

On election night, she spoke about her personal struggles with surrogacy. She said that experience helped inspire her decision to run.

Why Letitia Plummer’s Win Matters for Spelman

Spelman women had a big night across the country Tuesday. In New York, alumna Adrienne Adams won the lieutenant governor’s race. Now Plummer will run one of the largest counties in America.

Together, the wins show how far the Spelman network reaches in politics. Both women built careers outside government before winning office. And both broke barriers on the way up. For more on the school, check out our Spelman College coverage. You can also follow our Keisha Lance Bottoms coverage for more HBCU wins from election night.

What Comes Next

Plummer will take office in January. Between now and then, she will build her team and prepare for the county budget fight. For more on her path, the Houston Chronicle tracked her rise through a political roller coaster year.

Stay with HBCU Buzz for continued coverage of Harris County Judge-elect Letitia Plummer as she prepares to take office.

In this article:HBCU LOVE, Letitia Plummer, Spelman’s Dr. Letitia Plummer Makes History as Harris County’s First Black Elected County Judge

Based on reporting by Texas Metro News.



Continue Reading

Black History

Jason Driver Named St. Louis Public Library CEO

ST. LOUIS AMERICAN — The St. Louis Public Library has appointed Jason Driver as its next chief executive officer following a national search. Driver, a veteran administrator with 27 years of experience, currently leads the Kitsap Regional Library in Washington and previously served in several roles at the Chicago Public Library. He is scheduled to take over the 15-location system on January 4, succeeding longtime leader Waller McGuire. The appointment follows a period of notable activity for the system and recent management discussions in Driver’s current role. Read more.

Published

on

Jason Driver has been named the next chief executive officer of the St. Louis Public Library. The veteran library administrator will take over Jan. 4, 2027, succeeding longtime CEO Waller McGuire. Photo courtesy of St. Louis Public Library
Jason Driver has been named the next chief executive officer of the St. Louis Public Library. The veteran library administrator will take over Jan. 4, 2027, succeeding longtime CEO Waller McGuire. Photo courtesy of St. Louis Public Library

Jason Driver, a veteran library administrator with more than 27 years of experience, has been named the next chief executive officer of the St. Louis Public Library, taking over a 15-location system that serves more than 135,000 active cardholders.

Driver, who has led Kitsap Regional Library in the state of Washington since 2022, will begin his new position Jan. 4, succeeding Waller McGuire, who retired in October after 37 years with the St. Louis library system, including 22 years as its leader.

The appointment follows a national search and comes after the St. Louis system was named Missouri’s 2026 Library of the Year, in part for its response to the devastating May 2025 tornado. The library helped residents during the recovery, including through a tool-lending program established to assist with home repairs.

Driver told Sarah Fenske of St. Louis Magazine that he has no immediate plans to overhaul the system, which he described as a “well-oiled machine.”

“I’m a firm believer in one needing to follow before they can lead,” he said.

He plans to spend time learning from employees and the library board before deciding what changes might be needed.

Driver, a Chicago native, began his career working with young people in foster care through the Illinois Department of Children and Family Services. He later joined the Chicago Public Library, where he held positions ranging from children’s librarian and early literacy specialist to branch manager, regional director and district chief.

At Kitsap, Driver has overseen strategic planning, finances, communications and public services for a nine-branch system.

His selection follows several months of workplace controversy there, where union-represented employees questioned his management practices.

The Washington Public Employees Association raised concerns in May about communication, personnel decisions and branch closures. Union members later voted no confidence in Driver and called for his removal, according to reporting by Kitsap News Group.

A three-month independent investigation did not substantiate allegations of unlawful gender discrimination, retaliation or misconduct violating library policies. The Kitsap library board supported Driver’s continued leadership but acknowledged that communication, trust and workplace relationships needed improvement.

The board also said some employee concerns involving labor relations, collective bargaining and working conditions fell outside the investigation’s scope.

Driver told St. Louis Magazine he respected the union’s right to raise concerns and viewed the experience as an opportunity to improve communication.

“I definitely embrace the union to be able to have that pathway to speak out when there are things that they don’t agree with,” he said.

The St. Louis Public Library board independently confirmed the investigation’s findings with Kitsap trustees before hiring Driver, according to the St. Louis Business Journal.

“After a national search, the Board of Directors believes we have found in Jason an outstanding leader with the vision and experience to lead SLPL forward,” board President Nina North-Murphy said in a statement.

Driver will receive an annual salary of $240,000, the Business Journal reported.

Driver said returning to an urban library system was among the attractions of the St. Louis position. His background in social services, he said, helped prepare him to work with people from a wide range of circumstances.

“I felt like the background I had in social services really helped me to deal with some of the things we deal with in urban libraries,” he told Fenske.

He said libraries offer opportunities to serve people who might otherwise face barriers to accessing community resources.

“St. Louis is a wonderful city, it has a strong library core, and it certainly has a number of opportunities to dig in and help advance the mission and help the people of St. Louis,” Driver said.

The post Jason Driver named St. Louis Public Library CEO appeared first on St. Louis American.

Based on reporting by St. Louis American.



Continue Reading

Black History

Superb Woman: Destiny B. Sadler

TEXAS METRO NEWS — Destiny B. Sadler is a dynamic entrepreneur and empowerment coach who serves as a Top Executive with the global beauty brand LimeLife by Alcone. A graduate of Southern University, Sadler leverages her background in leadership and community impact to mentor others on the transformative power of confidence.

Published

on

Superb Woman: Destiny B. Sadler

Destiny B. Sadler is a dynamic entrepreneur, digital creator, and empowerment coach dedicated to helping individuals look, feel, and live at their absolute best. With a background rooted in leadership and community impact, she serves as a Top Executive with the global beauty brand LimeLife by Alcone, where she mentors a growing network of beauty guides and champions the transformative power of confidence.

Driven by a passion for personal development and education, Destiny founded YSTBYOU and You’re Simply the Best Kids, an educational services organization focused on building foundational confidence and leadership skills in youth. She’s a graduate of Lamar High School and Southern University. Destiny’s life work centers on a simple, powerful philosophy: embracing who you are is the ultimate key to success.

Based on reporting by Texas Metro News.



Continue Reading

Black Press

Campus Accountability: Universities Must Do More to Address Sexual Assault

SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY – SOUTHERNDIGEST — Colleges and universities are meant to be safe environments for learning and personal growth, yet recurring reports of sexual assault continue to challenge the effectiveness of institutional protections.

Published

on

Photo: iStockphoto / NNPA.
Photo: iStockphoto / NNPA.

College campuses are supposed to be places where students can learn, grow and feel safe. However, reports of sexual assault at universities across the country continue to raise questions about whether institutions are doing enough to protect their students and hold individuals accountable.

From Louisiana State University to Harvard University and Cornell University, campus sexual assault cases have brought renewed attention to how colleges investigate allegations, discipline students and support survivors. For many, the concern is not only the actions of students accused of sexual misconduct but also how university administrators respond when these situations occur.

At LSU, recent reporting has raised questions about the effectiveness of the university’s Title IX process. According to WBRZ, more than 300 sexual assault reports were made through LSU’s Title IX process between 2022 and 2025, with three resulting in disciplinary action. Although not every report results in a finding of responsibility, the numbers raise important questions about how institutions communicate outcomes and address reports of misconduct.

Cornell University has also faced scrutiny following allegations involving seven students and an alleged sexual assault at a fraternity house in 2024. The university’s investigation resulted in different disciplinary actions, including expulsions and suspensions. However, questions about one student’s return to campus and housing arrangements have continued to draw criticism.

These cases highlight a larger issue: University accountability cannot stop at having a Title IX office or publishing policies in a student handbook.

Title IX prohibits sex-based discrimination in federally funded education programs and addresses sexual harassment and sexual violence. Universities must have procedures for responding to complaints, conducting investigations and providing supportive measures. However, having policies in place means little if students do not understand them or believe reports will be handled appropriately.

Students who are found responsible for sexual misconduct should face consequences that reflect the seriousness of their actions. Universities should also examine whether their investigative procedures are timely, whether survivors receive adequate support and whether disciplinary decisions are consistently enforced.

Accountability must also include university administrators. Institutions should be transparent about their procedures, provide clear reporting options and regularly review whether their policies are working.

At the same time, every student involved in a disciplinary proceeding deserves a fair investigation and an opportunity to respond to allegations. Protecting survivors and respecting due process should not be treated as competing priorities.

Ultimately, universities have a responsibility that extends beyond academics and athletics. Students deserve to know that their safety matters and that misconduct will be taken seriously. A university’s commitment to student safety should be measured not only by the policies it publishes but also by the actions it takes when those policies are tested.

Based on reporting by Southern University – SouthernDIGEST.



Continue Reading

Black History

Alabama HBCU Founders Win Nearly $20,000 at 2026 HBCU Business Pitch Competition

BIRMINGHAM TIMES — The Alabama Collective and Digitalundivided recently awarded $20,000 in cash prizes to student and alumni founders during the 2026 HBCU Business Pitch Competition. Held at Topgolf Birmingham during Magic City Classic week, the event featured 51 participants representing 10 different Alabama institutions.

Published

on

Alabama HBCU Founders Win Nearly $20,000 at 2026 HBCU Business Pitch Competition

Bryson Hannah celebrates his first-place finish in the 2026 HBCU Business Pitch Competition in Birmingham, earning $5,000 for Internably LLC, his networking platform connecting college interns across the country. (Alabama A&M) ” data-large-file=”https://www.birminghamtimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/11/pitchbryson1edit-1024×685.jpg” />

Special to the Times

The Alabama Collective and co-host Digitalundivided awarded $20,000 in cash prizes to HBCU student and alumni founders at the 2026 HBCU Business Pitch Competition, held Thursday, October 29, at Topgolf Birmingham as part of Magic City Classic week.

Fifty-one founders representing 10 Alabama institutions competed in a booth-style format, delivering three-minute pitches with no slides or audiovisual aids, followed by three minutes of questions from a panel of industry judges. Top scorers at each booth earned $1,000 and advanced to a live Pitch Finale.

Internably, LLC, founded by Bryson Hannah of Alabama A&M University, took first place and $4,000. Internably is a networking platform that connects college students, interns, and early career professionals by company, school, city, and career interests.

“I was blown away by these innovative business ideas and the go-to-market strategies,” says Modupe Rouse, Digitalundivided Chair and Pitch Finale Judge. “These student founders took the START program skills and leveled up. I cannot wait for the economic impact of their businesses in Alabama,” added Rouse.

“What we witnessed at this year’s competition was a powerful reminder of the incredible talent, creativity, and entrepreneurial potential emerging from Alabama’s HBCUs,” said Charisse Stokes, Executive Director of The Alabama Collective. “These 51 founders didn’t just show up with ideas — they showed up with vision, determination, and the confidence to turn those ideas into businesses. We’re especially proud that this year’s partnership with Digitalundivided allowed us to expand beyond the competition itself, equipping entrepreneurs with business skills to launch their businesses, coaching, and connections that will serve them long after the prizes are awarded. Our goal is not simply to celebrate great pitches, but to help build the next generation of successful entrepreneurs and business owners across Alabama.”

“Digitalundivided is delighted to partner with TAC in its work with Alabama HBCUs and in supporting the innovation and talent of students here,” says Leah D. Williams, CEO of Digitalundivided. “These student founders are the business leaders of tomorrow. We are excited to add the Digitalundivided network lifting them up as they climb towards their future achievements.”

2026 Pitch Finale Winners

First Place, $4,000: Internably, LLC — Alabama A&M University
Second Place, $3,000: FuelTrip — Alabama A&M University
Third Place, $2,000: NexU — Alabama A&M University

Top-Scoring Booth Winners, $1,000 each

• VARA — Talladega College
• Yardly — Alabama State University
• AccessBelt — Alabama State University
• Nightshift — Talladega College
• FuelTrip — Alabama A&M University
• NexU — Alabama A&M University
• Internably, LLC — Alabama A&M University
• Mobile Therapy Office/Unlimited Potential — Alabama State University
• BeVerified — Alabama State University
• The Vent Avengers — Trenholm State Community College

A New Path to the Stage

The 2026 competition introduced two entry tracks. Members of The Alabama Collective community were invited to apply to START, Digitalundivided’s flagship pre-revenue incubator, a three-week virtual program grounded in Lean Startup methodology. Selected participants built a working Business Model Canvas, earned an automatic slot in the Round 1 pitch booths, and received a $250 completion stipend on event day. Alabama HBCU students, recent graduates, faculty and staff filled the remaining booths and brought in founders new to the organization.

Alongside the competition, the day included entrepreneurship training, small group mentoring with industry leaders, and a Lunch and Learn fireside chat.

The 2026 competition was supported by JPMorgan Chase, HBCU CARES and NEBIUS.

About The Alabama Collective

The Alabama Collective is a statewide nonprofit organization dedicated to elevating tech talent and entrepreneurs across Alabama. Through partnerships with HBCUs, industry leaders, and innovation hubs, The Alabama Collective builds programs that expose, educate, engage, and empower underrepresented communities in tech, entrepreneurship, and innovation.

About Digitalundivided

For over a decade, Digitalundivided has increased visibility and access for founders. Beginning with groundbreaking research and expanding into founder-centric training programs, strategic partnerships, and a vibrant founder community, Digitalundivided champions an equitable entrepreneurial landscape and provides founders at every stage with the space to improvise and innovate.

Based on reporting by Birmingham Times.



Continue Reading

SIGN UP TO RECEIVE NEWS UPDATES IN YOUR INBOX

Subscribe

* indicates required

Like BlackPressUSA on Facebook

Advertisement

Advertise on BlackPressUSA

advertise with blackpressusa.com

Latest News