Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Fact check: Have democrats decided what will be the first primary in 2028
Executive Summary
The Democratic National Committee has not yet chosen a single state as the official first primary for 2028; instead the DNC has opened a competitive application process with a January 16, 2026 (deadline reported January 16, per DNC timeline referenced) cutoff for states seeking spots in the early nominating window, and it has signaled criteria emphasizing a “rigorous, efficient and fair” contest [1] [2]. Several states—most notably New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina—are actively making their cases to be among the first contests, while Iowa and New Hampshire have indicated they may move forward independently if the DNC’s calendar does not align with their state laws or traditional timing [3] [4] [2]. No final, binding decision on the first primary has been announced as of late October 2025, and the DNC’s formal selection remains pending review of state applications and potential legal or political pushback.
1. Why there is no single answer yet — the DNC opened an application fight
The DNC has initiated a formal process to determine the early 2028 calendar by inviting states to apply for the early window and setting relative timelines; this marks a clear break from any unilateral announcement of a single “first” primary and places the decision in the hands of party organs reviewing applications against stated standards [2] [1]. The Rules and Bylaws Committee framed the process around fairness and rigor, and the DNC’s public messaging emphasizes evaluating state proposals rather than defaulting to historical order, reflecting a deliberate attempt to reshape nominating influence. Media reporting in October 2025 highlights that the DNC will weigh competing bids from multiple states rather than simply reaffirming traditional positions, and the January deadline for applications establishes a procedural waypoint rather than an immediate outcome [4] [1].
2. New Hampshire’s bid and legal complexity — tradition versus rules
New Hampshire is publicly lobbying to defend its traditional first-in-the-nation primary position, citing state law and civic participation as reasons it should lead off the calendar; party leaders within New Hampshire, including its Democratic chair, have made explicit appeals to preserve the state’s early role [3]. At the same time, the DNC’s application process allows other states to mount formal challenges, and the committee’s standards could deprioritize states that rely solely on historical precedence. Reporting notes that New Hampshire’s state law obligates it to hold the first primary, creating a potential legal and political standoff if the DNC grants first-window status to other states—a conflict that could produce litigation or unilateral state action [3] [2].
3. Other contenders and party aims — diversity and representativeness on the table
Nevada and South Carolina are preparing competitive bids focused on electorate diversity and party coalitions, and the DNC has emphasized wanting an early calendar that better reflects Democratic constituency diversity than past cycles—an explicit policy goal shaping which states the committee will favor [3] [4]. This shift signals an intentional move by the national party to rebalance nominating influence toward states with larger minority populations and different electoral dynamics, and it explains why the DNC opened a transparent application process: to justify selections by stated criteria rather than deference to tradition. Reporting in mid- to late-October 2025 frames the contest as both strategic and symbolic, with the DNC seeking to avoid perceptions of bias while navigating state-level legal constraints [4] [2].
4. Potential for states to act “rogue” and what that would mean
Iowa and New Hampshire have both signaled willingness to hold early contests regardless of the DNC’s final calendar, raising the prospect of unsanctioned or “rogue” primaries that could complicate delegate allocation and candidate strategy [2]. If either state proceeds outside DNC approval, the national party could impose sanctions such as reducing or nullifying delegates, a tool the DNC used in prior cycles to enforce calendar rules. Reports emphasize this as a credible risk because state laws and political cultures in those early-voting states create incentives to preserve traditional timing, and the DNC’s selection will likely trigger intense legal and political bargaining in the months ahead [2] [3].
5. The timeline and likely next steps — applications, review, and political jockeying
The immediate next steps are procedural: states submit applications by the DNC’s set deadline, the Rules and Bylaws Committee reviews submissions against party criteria, and the DNC will announce selections after deliberation—timing and finality remain uncertain but the process is underway as of October 2025 [1] [2]. Expect parallel political campaigns and lobbying by state party leaders, potential court challenges if state laws conflict with DNC rulings, and media scrutiny of how selections align with the party’s diversity goals, making the period between the application deadline and any final calendar announcement the most consequential phase. The reporting as of October 17–27, 2025, consistently shows process initiation rather than a conclusive outcome, so observers should treat any claims of a decided “first primary” as premature until the DNC formally publishes its calendar [4] [1].