The Assembly Oversight Reform and Federal Regulations Committee voted to release A4083, the John R. Lewis Voter Empowerment Act of New Jersey, after more than an hour of testimony from election administrators, civil‑rights organizations and voting‑rights advocates.

Proponents said the bill would create a state‑level voting‑rights law to protect voters in the face of federal rollbacks and to expand language access, preclearance processes, and enforcement tools. Nuzat Chowdhury of the New Jersey Institute for Social Justice said the bill “builds on the legacy of the federal Voting Rights Act of 1965” and would strengthen protections for Black and other voters of color. Liza Weisberg, a senior staff attorney with the ACLU of New Jersey, described the bill’s pre‑suit notification and preclearance features as ways to avoid long, harmful litigation and to “nip in the bud any harm before it can transpire.”

Election administrators testified with concerns about implementation and scope. Linda Hughes, administrator of the Burlington County Board of Elections and a board member of the New Jersey Association of Election Officials, said New Jersey’s current systems already provide multiple voting opportunities and argued the state voter registration system lacks demographic fields to identify protected classes. Hughes warned the bill could move much election authority into court remedies and create inconsistent rules across jurisdictions: “By allowing the courts to intervene… judges in New Jersey would be able to overturn election results, redraw district boundaries, change the dates of elections,” she said, summarizing possible remedies described by opponents.

Testimony also highlighted language access. Amber Reid of AAPI New Jersey noted that 30% of Asian Americans in the state identify as limited‑English proficient, and said the bill would require translation of voting materials where either 4,000 people or 2% of the voting‑age population speaks a language other than English. Madison Linton of the New Jersey Alliance for Immigrant Justice urged culturally competent translation and warned against machine‑only translation.

Several civil‑rights and civic groups supported the bill on the record: the New Jersey Institute for Social Justice, the ACLU of New Jersey, the New Jersey League of Conservation Voters, AAPI New Jersey, NAACP New Jersey State Conference, the New Jersey Alliance for Immigrant Justice, the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism New Jersey (RAC), the League of Women Voters of New Jersey, and We the People Coalition.

Opposition testimony — represented during debate by Assemblyman Engannert — argued that New Jersey does not exhibit the widespread, systemic discrimination the bill addresses and criticized locating the new enforcement division within the Department of the Treasury while keeping the Attorney General’s office in an advisory role. Engannert said the proposal “centralizes the administration of New Jersey's elections in the court system” and described practical difficulties for county boards of elections, including lack of voter demographic fields in the statewide registration system and additional translation costs relative to the federal standard.

Chair Atkins called for and the committee approved a motion to release the reprint of A4083 as amended. On the motion, Assemblyman Tracy recorded an abstention. Assemblyman Engannert recorded a no vote; Assemblywoman Murphy, Assemblyman Miller, Vice Chair Freeman, and Chair Atkins recorded yes votes. The committee entered the bill as “released as amended.”

Committee advocates asked lawmakers to restore protections for LGBTQ and voters with criminal histories that were removed from the present reprint; several witnesses urged that language be reintroduced in later drafts. Proponents argued the state law is necessary because federal protections have been weakened by recent court decisions and administrative changes.

With the committee release, A4083 advances in the legislative process; supporters and opponents said more work remains on specific protected classes, the placement and role of an enforcement division, and funding and operational responsibilities for language access and preclearance procedures.