Legislative Updates
Alabama: The Senate approved a bill that would criminalize some forms of absentee voting assistance to have more aggressive penalties for “ballot-harvesting.” SB 1, sponsored by Sen. Garlan Gudger, R-Cullman, would make it illegal for someone to “knowingly” provide an absentee ballot application with pre-filled information, with exceptions for emergency medical care. “This is a bill about voting rights and the integrity of our elections in the state of Alabama and this bill is and should be a bill for every Alabamian,” said Gudger. The bill passed 27-8 on party lines, after a nearly three-hour filibuster from Democrats who said the bill would make it much more difficult for people with disabilities in rural areas to vote. Gudger’s bill makes it a Class C felony, punishable by up to 10 years in prison, for a person to receive payment or a gift for “distributing, ordering, requesting, collecting, completing, prefilling, obtaining or delivering” a voter’s application. A person who knowingly pays or provides a gift to a “third party to distribute, order, request, collect, prefill, complete, obtain or deliver” an application for an absentee ballot would be guilty of a Class B felony, punishable by up to 20 years in prison. The bill includes exceptions for some disabilities and does not impact members of the armed services stationed overseas. Four amendments to the bill were also added on the floor. The amendments allow some handwritten requests; allow the marking of which election the ballot is for; require a person must declare they are not barred from voting because of a felony or that their voting right has been restored rather than they have not been convicted of any disqualifying felonies; and makes allowances for those who work for utilities in cases of needing to travel to provide mutual aid.
Arizona: After weeks of negotiations, lawmakers at the Legislature agreed to a bipartisan bill to fix election deadline issues that threatened to put ballots for military personnel and the state’s presidential votes at risk. County officials warned that an increase in the number of mandatory recounts triggered by a law passed in 2022 would not leave them with enough time to issue ballots to UOCAVA voters after the August primary by a federally-imposed deadline. There are different fears about the general election, when an influx of recounts could create delays that conflict with a new federal law that requires the state to certify its presidential electors by Dec. 11. All parties involved, including both Democratic and Republican lawmakers, agreed they needed to solve that problem by giving election officials more time to perform recounts and other post-election activities. Democrats sought to roll back the 2022 recount law. Republicans, who hold a slim one-vote majority in the state House and Senate, backed a different bill that included other election calendar changes sought by county officials that run elections, including moving the primary this year up by a week to July 30. The bill also limits the days primary candidates have to proofread ballots from five to two days; allows counties to transmit their official vote counts to the state electronically; and speeds up the state’s official vote tally. It also allows counties to conduct the five-day cure period, or the time period after an election when mail-in voters can correct any problems with their signatures on a ballot envelope, over five calendar days instead of the five business days that counties currently allow. But the GOP bill also codifies signature verification standards for mail-in ballots in state law, a Republican election priority that is unrelated to the election deadline issue.
On a party-line vote, a Senate committee passed a bill that would ban voter registration workers from getting paid strictly by the amount of names they register. Republican Sen. Ken Bennett, the bill’s sponsor, says the current rules incentivize workers to commit fraud by adding names. “It doesn’t prohibit people employing people to do a voter registration project. You just can’t pay them by name,” Bennett said. Bennett says Hobbs had vetoed a similar bill last legislative session, so he would be willing to modify his latest bill to avoid a repeat of last year.
Georgia: Pictures of Georgia ballots would be displayed online for the public to see and review after elections, according to a bill that unanimously passed a House committee. The proposal would enable voters to check ballots and count votes for themselves after each election. If the bill becomes law, millions of ballots could be put online this year. In the last presidential election, 5 million Georgia voters turned out. State Rep. John LaHood, the sponsor of House Bill 974, said it’s the latest step toward greater transparency and accountability in elections. “Those who want to count for themselves and inspect can do so to their heart’s content,” said LaHood, a Republican from Valdosta and chairman of the House Governmental Affairs Committee. LaHood’s bill requires the secretary of state’s office to create a statewide program to display ballot images for 24 months after each election. Ballot images are already public records in Georgia, available at a cost from county election offices. Original paper ballots would remain sealed unless a judge requires their disclosure. Absentee ballots, which have received the most scrutiny from election skeptics, would be posted at the highest resolution available, according to the bill. Ballots printed from Georgia’s touchscreens could be displayed at a lower resolution. The bill doesn’t include any funding, but LaHood said the expense would be minimal because the secretary of state’s office is already working on a ballot image website. The secretary of state’s office did not weigh in on the bill.
The House overwhelmingly voted to increase the number of election audits, requiring human verification of two statewide races each election. The bill is the latest Republican-sponsored proposal to tweak election rules ahead of this year’s presidential race. The bill calls for the top race on the ballot to be audited each election along with another statewide race chosen by the governor, lieutenant governor, speaker of the House and the minority leaders in the state House and Senate. The House passed the bill on a 164-3 vote, and it will next be considered by the state Senate.
Guam: A total of seven bills were deliberated, all sponsored by Senator Roy Wuinata, who worked with the Election Commission in drafting the measures. GEC offered testimony in support of all of them. Program Coordinator Tom San Agustin said, “Bill 216 allows for Guam Police Department intervention should electioneering occur at the polls, and provides further collaboration with GPD. GEC seeks to establish safer electioneering parameters for the polling sites throughout the island.” “Bill 217 seeks to change the deadline for tabulating provisional ballots which would allow the GEC to synchronize its timetable for tabulating both absentee and provisional,” He added. San Agustin also said, “Bill 218 seeks to change the close of registration 10 days to 21 days prior to an election, which would consistently apply the close of registration to all avenues, further this additional time will help the GEC to ensure and protect the accuracy of the voter registry.” Among the other bills: there’s one that would require write-in names to be published only if the total would impact race results. Another would eliminate the Attorney General and the Public Auditor races from the primary election, because they’re non-partisan positions.
Indiana: A contested election bill with new citizenship checks and data buys could soon undergo edits. House Bill 1264 has won praise from some who say it would improve election security. But it’s also rankled voting rights advocates — who fear it could disenfranchise some eligible voters — and deadlocked the bipartisan state clerks association. The bill creates new requirements for first-time voters, proof of citizenship and more. It also would allow state election officials to pay for commercially available data — likely Experian’s TrueTrace — and let county voter registration offices use the information for voter list maintenance. The measure also requires people registering to vote for the first time in person to show proof of residency. If the application doesn’t include the person’s Indiana driver’s license number or the last four digits of their Social Security number, additional proof would be needed — a current and valid photo ID or a current utility bill, bank statement, government check, paycheck, or government document that shows their name and address.
Iowa: Lawmakers advanced a pair of bills this week that would make a raft of changes to elections, including banning ranked choice voting, standardizing training and limiting ballot eligibility challenges for federal candidates. The bill with the more significant changes of the two, Senate Study Bill 3161, would do the following: Limit challenges of petitions of federal candidates to the legal sufficiency of the petition, or the residency, age or citizenship requirements of the candidate. Create a pilot program for a third party to maintain Iowa’s voter database. Ban ranked choice voting. Ban the use of ballot drop boxes in the state. Require that absentee ballots be received by a county auditor’s office the day before the election, and allow the auditor to begin mailing absentee ballots two days earlier. The bill was passed out of a Senate subcommittee by the two Republican members. Democratic Sen. Janice Weiner, of Iowa City, did not vote to advance the bill. Sen. Jason Schultz, R-Schleswig, the chair of the Senate State Government Committee and sponsor of the two bills, said the bill was a “settling of our election procedures” and intended to instill trust in Iowa’s election process.
Nebraska: LB-1211 would reduce the time that voters have to receive, complete and return absentee ballots or vote early in person from 35 days to 22. Heidi Uhing, director of public policy for the group Civic Nebraska, questioned the logic of condensing election officials’ time to process ballots – especially now, when they’re preparing for the state’s first election requiring voter ID. Cherry County Election Commissioner Brittny Longcor said 13 fewer days could make a big difference in mailing absentee ballots and getting them back in time. But she said she believes the change would be especially problematic for the state’s high-population counties. “Like in Douglas County, it will cause a time crunch for the processing of all of those,” she said, “because, you know, we have 4,000 or so here to process, where they have hundreds of thousands to process.” Cherry County, population roughly 5,500, has all vote-by-mail elections, which Nebraska allows for counties with populations of less than 10,000.
New Jersey: The senate State Government, Wagering, Tourism, and Historic Preservation Committee released Senate Bill 1255, which requires mail-in ballot applications be available at polling places on election day for voting in future elections. Under the bill, the County Clerk would make available at each polling place on the day of any election copies of mail-in ballot applications for future elections. The bill passed unanimously. S-1230 would prohibit electioneering within 25 feet of a person waiting in line at a polling place or ballot drop box in an area that is farther than 100 feet from the polling place or ballot drop box. Violations of this provision would constitute a disorderly persons offense. A disorderly persons offense can result in a fine of up to $1,000 and up to six months in jail.
New Mexico: The House of Representatives voted this week in favor of a measure that would prohibit firearms within 100 feet of polling places. Supporters have said the measure would prevent voter intimidation at the polls. Violations of the law would be a petty misdemeanor. Rep. Reena Szczepanski, D-Santa Fe, was a sponsor on a similar bill last year. This year, she said, several changes have been added to protect gun owners who are walking by or happen to be near a polling station but don’t intend to vote there. There’s also carve-outs for people who leave their guns in the car while they vote. Another exception was added on the House floor.. As the bill has moved through committee, conservative legislators have pushed to allow concealed carry license holders to bring their weapons to the polling station. Until Tuesday, those amendments have failed to gain traction. During the debate, Rep. Bill Rehm, R-Albuquerque, introduced an amendment with the concealed carry exception, with a requirement that the gun must remain hidden. The amendment succeeded on the slimmest of margins with a 35-34 vote. Despite the addition of the compromise amendment, no Republicans voted in favor of the bill. The amendment succeeded on the slimmest of margins with a 35-34 vote. Despite the addition of the compromise amendment, no Republicans voted in favor of the bill. The altered bill headed to the Senate where the changes were approved. It now heads to the governor’s desk for signature.
North Carolina: State Senator Jay Chaudhuri announced plans to introduce a bill that would grant the Board of Elections the ability to remove a presidential candidate from the ballot. On X, Twitter, Chaudhuri said that the hearing is “one of the most important cases in our country’s modern history.” Chaudhuri said the Board of Elections should have the authority to remove a presidential candidate under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which prevents those who “engaged in insurrection” from running for president. The same section is being argued at the Supreme Court. Chaudhuri’s plan follows a complaint filed in December with the elections board by retired North Carolina attorney Brian Martin, who says the Constitution disqualifies Trump because of his involvement in the Jan. 6 insurrection. The board held 4-1 that state law didn’t give them the authority to consider a challenge to a presidential candidate being on a primary ballot.
Oklahoma: Lawmakers are considering the prohibition of ranked-choice voting in state elections. Rep. Eric Roberts, R- Oklahoma City, introduced House Bill 3156 to the House Elections and Ethics Committee, this week. The measure would ban voters listing candidates for public office in order of preference on their ballots, and election boards from certifying race results determined that way. Roberts said changing the way the state conducts elections would fix an unbroken system. “It has been said that Oklahoma’s election laws are some of the best in the nation,” Roberts said. “Why would we scrap them for another system that relies on computer algorithms to choose the winner?” Rep. Mickey Dollens, D-Oklahoma City, was a vocal proponent of ranked-choice voting at the committee meeting. He said the voting method can save the state money, reduce partisanship in elections and give third-party candidates a fighting chance. He said voters he’s talked to support preference-based voting. Paul Ziriax, the Oklahoma State Election Board Secretary, testified during the committee meeting and backed up Roberts’ concerns. Ziriax said the voting machines the state uses now cannot read ranked-choice ballots and aren’t due to be upgraded for another four to eight years. The measure was approved in committee with a 5-2 vote and can now be heard by the full House.
Tennessee: A bill that would move up the deadline for voters to request an absentee ballot passed the Tennessee Senate this week and is advancing quickly in the House. Senate Bill 1967, by Sen. Richard Briggs, R-Knoxville, would require voters who wish to vote absentee to request an absentee ballot at least 10 days before Election Day – up from the current seven-day deadline. The bill would have no impact on qualified medical exemptions. “We’re misleading our voters and people who want to vote for them to think that they can request a ballot on day seven and their vote will be counted,” Briggs said. “In reality that’s just not true.” If adopted, the bill would take effect on Nov. 6, 2024, so it would not impact any elections taking place this year. Currently, Tennessee absentee voting procedures rely almost entirely on U.S. mail delivery. Once requested by mail, fax, or email, election officials are required to mail absentee ballots to voters. Then voters are required to mail absentee ballots back to their Election Commission via USPS, FedEx, or UPS. Tennessee is one of only a few states that does not allow voters to hand deliver ballots to county election commissions. Briggs noted during the Knoxville mayoral election last year, 90% of the absentee ballots requested on the seventh day before the election were not counted because they were not received by the Election Commission in time to be counted.
Utah: The House Government Operations Committee advanced a bill that seeks to abandon a pilot project to try ranked choice voting in the state. The Committee voted 7-4 to support House Bill 290, which would repeal ranked choice voting in cities across Utah. The pilot project, which allowed municipalities to opt in to use the alternative form of voting, would have run until 2026. Under HB 290, it would end this year. Rep. Katy Hall, R-South Ogden, argued the pilot project was not showing signs of success and there were issues with ranked choice voting. But she faced pushback from some who testified in support of it, including the League of Women Voters of Utah and Salt Lake City Council member Dan Dugan, who was elected in a ranked choice voting election. “I spoke in opposition to the bill as I believe municipalities should be allowed to make the decision on whether or not to use [ranked choice voting] and to let the pilot program continue,” he said.
Washington: In a bid to enhance voter engagement and participation, local governments across the state could have a choice to shift their elections to even years and skip the odd years’. After an hour-long floor debate, the state House passed House Bill 1932 Thursday by a vote of 52-45 with one member excused. Six Democrats joined all of the Republicans in voting against the bill. It’s one of the closest votes taken so far during this legislative session. The bill will give cities, towns and certain special-purpose districts the option to hold their elections in even-numbered years instead of odd-numbered years. Currently, odd-numbered years are primarily dedicated to local elections, while even-numbered years encompass statewide and national elections alongside certain local measures. This discrepancy often results in lower voter turnout during odd-numbered years, prompting concerns about democratic representation at the local level. Under the proposed bill, jurisdictions wishing to transition to even-numbered-year elections would have the flexibility to do so through various mechanisms. The legislative body of the respective jurisdiction could adopt an ordinance or policy, or alternatively, voters could approve an ordinance or charter amendment referred to by the legislative body. However, any decision to make the switch must be finalized before Jan. 15 of an odd-numbered year to take effect in that election cycle. Lawmakers eliminated a mandate in a previous version that said jurisdictions with voter turnouts below 40% in four consecutive general elections must switch to even-numbered year elections.
West Virginia: The Senate Judiciary Committee advanced three voting-related bills to the full Senate. Two deal with purging inactive voters or voters who’ve moved away from the voter rolls. SB 622 trims the time period for removing inactive voters from eight years to six years. As explained by committee counsel and by Deak Kersey, secretary of state’s general counsel, when a voter is inactive for four years, which would include not voting and not renewing a driver’s license among other things, the county clerk must send out a confirmation notice to the voter. If the card isn’t returned the person goes on inactive status, and after two more federal election cycles of inactivity – another four years – the clerk would then purge that voter from the rolls. The bill would shorten the period the clerk has to wait to send out the confirmation notice to two years. This bill and the other two would all take effect Jan. 1, 2025 – after the current election – if passed into law. SB 624 also deals with purging the rolls and would come into play when the state is up and running with the State-to-State information sharing program. Under the program, when a West Virginia voter acquires a driver’s license in a participating state, that information would be transmitted to West Virginia, allowing purging of the voter from the rolls without the confirmation process. SB 623 requires the Division of Motor Vehicles to send images from a resident’s driver’s license or photo ID to the secretary of state for voter identification purposes. Kersey told the senators that the DMV already sends images of voter signatures to the office, which are sent out to the county clerks. This will give an extra layer of security and can make the poll workers’ jobs easier by giving them an extra form of identification when a signature might be unclear or not match the voter’s signature that day.
Wisconsin: The Wisconsin Senate Committee on Shared Revenue, Consumer Protection and Elections held a public hearing last week on a proposed resolution to amend the state constitution to prohibit the use of ranked choice voting in all elections. The proposed resolution, authored by Sen. Duey Stroebel (R-Saukville) and Rep. Ty Bodden (R-Hilbert) is one half of a dueling pair of bills on the issue. A separate bill that has bipartisan support would establish a final-five runoff system for the state’s congressional elections. In both systems, voters can rank all the candidates on the ballot or only one. Critics of the systems say the process can be confusing to voters and take a long time to determine a winner. The proponents of the final-five bill in Wisconsin say those problems are limited to straight ranked choice voting, and their system solves those problems.’
Wyoming: A bill filed by state lawmakers could make it so voters have to live in the state for at least 30 days to register. The bill’s proponents say it clears up ambiguity around who exactly is qualified to vote in Wyoming. However, some lawmakers argue it represents a solution to a problem Wyoming doesn’t really have. In general, voter fraud in the state is rare, and they say this proposed requirement would be another barrier to voting. Fremont County Clerk Julie Freese said this bill could clear up some misconceptions. It comes as poll workers and election officials have been under increased scrutiny in recent years following attempts to overturn the results of the 2020 election. The new regulation would make people sign an updated oath when registering to vote, but wouldn’t require them to bring physical identification to prove their residency. If a voter lies about the length of their residency when registering, county clerks can refer them to law enforcement, according to Freese.
Legal Updates
Arizona: The Republican National Committee joined with the state and Yavapai County GOP in a lawsuit filed late last week to stop new voting rules they say will allow election fraud. The new suit against Secretary of State Adrian Fontes is the second his office is facing by Republicans complaining about the Elections Procedures Manual issued in December. The manual provides detailed guidance for county officials on how to run elections. State Senate President Warren Petersen and House Speaker Ben Toma sued Fontes on Jan. 31 over five provisions in the manual they say undermine previous Republican “voter confidence measures.” The latest lawsuit, filed in Maricopa County Superior Court, adds nine other complaints. “The new EPM weakens safeguards against non-citizen voting during a time of unprecedented illegal immigration on Arizona’s southern border, unlawfully limits the ability to challenge early ballots, and violates numerous provisions of Arizona law meant to protect election integrity,” RNC Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel, who’s stepping down from her position this month, said in a statement about the lawsuit. A statement by Gina Swoboda, the new chair of the Republican Party of Arizona who previously worked in the Secretary of State’s Office, accuses Fontes of releasing the manual “at the last second during the holidays” to avoid scrutiny. Fontes is reviewing the lawsuit, according to spokesman Aaron Thacker. The office declined other comment for now. The office put out a statement after the Jan. 31 lawsuit filing saying Fontes was “prepared to defend the EPM that was created to provide uniformity and clarity for elections officials, so they can administer free and fair elections for the people of Arizona.”
The America First Policy Institute on behalf of the Arizona Free Enterprise Club has sued Secretary of State Adrian Fontes over the most recent iteration of the state’s elections rulebook, specifically on the guidance on poll watchers and drop boxes. The suit alleges its limitations on monitoring ballot drop boxes and polling locations are unconstitutional. Their latest suit argues drop box monitors are protected by the First Amendment. It contends the new voting rulebook aims to “criminalize” their conduct. They note their organization is “interested in observing activities at drop boxes” and “conveying a message to others that the drop boxes are being watched and should be watched.” “These activities — watching drop boxes, speaking to people at election sites, and photographing activity at election sites — all constitute forms of speech,” the suit reads.
Colorado: The U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments this week in a Colorado case attempting to keep former President Donald Trump off the ballot in the Mile High State. According to SCOTUS Blog, the high court appeared ready to hold that Colorado cannot exclude Trump from the ballot based on his role in the Jan. 6, 2021, attacks on the U.S. Capitol. During an oral argument that lasted for more than two hours, justices of all ideological stripes questioned the wisdom of allowing a state to make its own decisions about whether a candidate should appear on the ballot, both because of the effect that such decisions would have on the rest of the country and because of the hurdles that courts would face in reviewing those decisions. A central issue at the oral argument was whether the question of how Section 3’s ban on government service by individuals who have “engaged in insurrection” can be enforced – do states like Colorado have the power to enforce it themselves, as the voters contend, or (as Trump argues) can it only be enforced through laws passed by Congress? There is no way to know when the justices will issue their decision, SCOTUS Blog wrote. The Colorado Supreme Court’s ruling is currently on hold, so Trump will remain on the ballot there unless the justices decide otherwise, but the court is nonetheless likely to act relatively quickly to resolve the issue because of its significance for other states where challenges to his eligibility are pending.
Florida: Chief U.S. District Judge Mark Walker has ruled that restrictions on after-hour drop boxes may make it inconvenient to return ballots outside business hours, but they don’t keep Floridians from voting. Walker previously had ruled that restrictions in Florida’s 2021 election law would have suppressed Black voters, but parts of that decision were overturned by an appellate court and sent back to the Tallahassee judge to reconsider. Often sounding conflicted about how to respond to the appellate court decision, Walker said in his latest ruling that the voting rights groups that had challenged Florida’s election law failed to show that the restrictions on drop boxes unduly burdened voters. The judge also said that restrictions in the law on third-party voter registration groups also failed to be proven unduly burdensome.
Guam: Three federal judges heard arguments in Honolulu as the Ninth Circuit considered Borja v. Nago, a federal lawsuit that seeks to expand voting rights in U.S. territories by challenging discriminatory federal and state overseas voting laws. Under the challenged laws, former residents of Hawaii or other states who live in a foreign country or the Northern Mariana Islands remain free to vote for president by absentee ballot in their former state of residence. But former residents who live in Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands, or other territories cannot. The Borja plaintiffs argue this violates the Constitution’s guarantee of equal protection. The hearing was an appeal of a 2022 district court decision denying their claims, according to a press release from Right to Democracy. Neil Weare, co-counsel in the case and co-director of Right to Democracy, which has joined Borja to sue to advance democracy, equity, self-determination in U.S. territories, said the Ninth Circuit has the opportunity to ensure the same legal standards apply to voting in U.S. territories as they do to voting anywhere else. The lawsuit is part of a broader effort by Right to Democracy to advance democracy, equity, and self-determination in U.S. territories.
Louisiana: U.S. District Judge Shelly Dick of the Middle District of Louisiana ruled that maps Louisiana lawmakers drew two years ago to update the boundaries of their own districts do not give Black voters a fair opportunity to elect their own representatives. Dick rejected the state House and Senate maps, saying that they violate the Voting Rights Act. Her ruling comes in the case Nairne v. Ardoin, in which Black voters sued the secretary of state and Republican legislative leaders. The plaintiffs argued the maps unlawfully dilute Black voting strength by gerrymandering the districts to minimize the number of majority-Black House and Senate seats. Dick’s order gives the state a “reasonable period of time” to approve new legislative districts that do not violate Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, which prohibits voting laws or procedures that purposefully discriminate on the basis of race, color or membership in a language minority group. Dick did not specify in her ruling what a reasonable period of time is or the number of majority Black districts necessary to comply with the Voting Rights Act. Plaintiffs have said the state should add six in the House and three in the Senate. Currently, 28 out of 105 House seats are majority Black, as are 11 of 39 Senate seats. Her ruling also does not specify when the maps need to take effect. One possibility would be 2027, when the next legislative elections are held.
North Carolina: A federal lawsuit filed more than five years ago challenging North Carolina’s new photo voter identification mandate is now set to go to trial in the spring, with an outcome that could possibly affect what people must do to cast ballots this fall. The U.S. District Court in Winston-Salem announced this week that Judge Loretta Biggs will convene the nonjury trial starting May 6 over the law, which was implemented just last fall. While the state’s photo ID requirement remains in place for the March 5 primary elections, a spring or summer ruling after the trial by Biggs to strike down the law could threaten its use in the November general election. The May date is about three months later than the date that lawyers for the state NAACP and several local chapters had requested several months ago. They sued over the 2018 law claiming it is marred by racial bias.
Pennsylvania: Two Pennsylvania House lawmakers sued the state’s 67 board of elections offices and Pennsylvania itself over absentee ballots. State House Republicans David Zimmerman and Kathy Rapp sued over a disparity between the Pa. Constitution and the state’s Election Code. Currently, voters use drop-off boxes or return absentee ballots to their county board of elections office. Zimmerman and Rapp argue that all absentee ballots should be returned to the voting district that the voter resides in. Officials then canvas the ballots – the number of ballots received is counted, not the number of votes. After canvassing, ballots from each voting district should be sent to their county office for vote counting, according to the state’s Constitution. However, all Pa. counties follow the state’s Election Code, which states the opposite. Officials canvass and count absentee ballots at their county board of elections office. The lawsuit asks the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania to decide whether election officials should follow the state’s Constitution or the Election Code’s regulations on absentee voting.
Wisconsin: The Elias Law Group on behalf of Priorities USA has asked the Wisconsin Supreme Court to take up a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of several voting rules ahead of the state’s 2024 presidential election. The three matters targeted in the lawsuit are: Wisconsin’s requirement that returned absentee ballots must be accompanied by a valid witness signature; the Wisconsin Supreme Court’s 2022 ruling that unmanned absentee ballot drop boxes are illegal; and state law setting an 8 p.m. Election Day deadline for when voters can “cure” or correct errors on their absentee ballots. The plaintiffs in the case argued the rules “infringe upon the fundamental right to vote in violation of the Wisconsin Constitution.” In her decision, Judge Ann Peacock ruled the lawsuit did not meet the “high burden” needed to find the voting rules cited in the lawsuit were unconstitutional. Peacock did not address the legality of absentee ballot drop boxes, noting she leaves “any revisiting of that decision to the Wisconsin Supreme Court.” Elias Law Group later filed notice of an appeal to Peacock’s ruling and last week issued a new request seeking to bypass the Wisconsin Court of Appeals and have the state Supreme Court take up the matter directly.
NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote! Michael H. Drucker
No comments:
Post a Comment