First Amendment Watch at NYU Interviews William A. Brewer III on Challenge to New York’s Even Year Election Law

February 20, 2026 — First Amendment Watch at NYU recently interviewed William A. Brewer III regarding Brewer, Attorneys & Counselors’ constitutional challenge to New York’s Even Year Election Law (EYEL), which moves most local elections outside New York City from odd- to even-numbered years.

Filed December 29, 2025, an amended complaint alleges the law violates the First Amendment and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. The lawsuit seeks a declaration that the EYEL is unconstitutional, an order barring its enforcement, and relief permitting localities to opt in or out. Plaintiffs include the New York Republican State Committee, the New York State Association of Town Superintendents of Highways, and a coalition of counties, local candidates, and voters.

In the interview, Brewer emphasized the historical purpose of separating local and national election cycles.

“Most local elections occur on an ‘odd cycle,’” Brewer explained. “The reason for that really goes back to the late 1890s, when what was then the Progressive Party and a reform movement intended to break political corruption. Almost universally, the solution was seen as [a need] to separate out the important issues that are debated and ultimately decided in local elections into odd years so that they would have their own space in the town square to communicate with voters about those important issues.”

Under the EYEL, local contests will appear on ballots dominated by presidential, federal, and statewide races. Brewer argued that this shift burdens core political speech.

“By consolidating thousands of local races beneath high-salience state and federal contests, the Even Year Election Law purposely and effectively subordinates local elections to state and national political dynamics and diminishes the ability of local candidates to reach their constituents,” he said. “By pushing local contests to the bottom of overcrowded ballots, the EYEL reduces visibility, drives up campaign costs, and weakens the connection between candidates and voters.”

Brewer further stated: “The First Amendment protects not just technical ballot access, but meaningful political opportunity and robust debate. When the state deliberately redesigns election mechanics to bury a defined class of candidates and skew democratic competition, it imposes a severe burden on core political speech – and that violates the First Amendment.”

New York Attorney General Letitia James has moved to dismiss the complaint. The case is pending in federal court.

Read the full interview here: Attorney William Brewer on New York’s Even Year Election Law and the First Amendment | First Amendment Watch