Ballot Measures, Legislation & Rulemaking
Maryland Rulemaking: State elections board members unanimously approved a bylaw that restricts communication with groups in active litigation against election officials. The emergency change follows published reports that Jim Shalleck, the vice chair of the board, and Diane Butler exchanged emails with a plaintiff in a lawsuit that is the subject of an appeal before the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Yaakov “Jake” Weissmann, one of three Democrats on the five-member panel said he “was disturbed by some of the emails in the article” and felt moved to work on emergency changes to the bylaws that govern the board and the actions of members. As originally proposed, the bylaw change barred board members from communicating with parties or organizations who have filed lawsuits against the board. Instead, communications would have to go through the attorney for the state board. The provision, as drafted, also asked board members to avoid communicating with members of the public who are “representatives of organizations or named parties actively engaged in litigation against the board.” That line was removed after Butler expressed concerns that the definition was open to interpretation and would make it difficult for board members to know who is a member of such a group.
North Carolina: The Legislature stepped into the middle of local disputes over early voting by enacting a law requiring Henderson and McDowell counties to add more voting locations. The bill, which was introduced and approved on October 24, covers 13 western Helene-damaged counties, and requires that they have at least one early voting location for every 30,000 voters “or any portion thereof.” Only Henderson and McDowell don’t meet that requirement. Henderson County has one early voting site and more than 92,000 registered voters as of last Saturday, according to state Board of Elections data. McDowell County has about 31,000 registered voters and one early voting location. The McDowell Republican Party asked for an additional site, but the local board of elections rejected the request, according to the McDowell News. The bill passed the House 106-2 and passed the Senate unanimously.
Ohio: Senator Niraj Antani (R-Miamisburg) introduced a bill that could change voter registration requirements in Ohio. Antani introduced a bill that requires proof of voters’ citizenship to register. The bill would require everyone to provide proof of citizenship to register to vote or to update voter registration. It would also designate an elector who registers on a federal form without providing proof of citizenship as a federal-only voter. Among the approved forms of citizenship are birth certificates, passports, certificates of naturalization or citizenship certificates and driver’s licenses, if a board of elections verifies the Bureau of Motor Vehicles has received documentation that proves citizenship. State IDs would also be accepted if they do not include a notation designating the individual is a noncitizen.
Marathon County, Wisconsin: The county board of supervisors passed a measure that aims to protect local election officials from threats and harassment. Poll workers county-wide have faced harassment in recent years, according to the county clerk. While a disorderly conduct measure already exists in the county’s code of ordinance, the added code will now allow law enforcement officials to issue citations for disorderly conduct against local election officials like municipal clerks and poll workers. Some supervisors opposed to the amendment said it will stifle the rights of citizens to question officials and infringe their First Amendment rights. The new subsection calls for a fine of between $500 to $1,000 for anyone who engages in “violent, abusive, indecent, profane, boisterous, unreasonably loud or otherwise disorderly conduct under circumstances in which such conduct tends to cause or provoke a disturbance.” When a vote was taken, 21 supervisors voted in favor of the code’s addition and 10 against it. Seven other supervisors in the 38-member board were either excused from the meeting or were absent.
Legal Updates
Arizona: Pinal County voters who show up to vote at the wrong polling place on Election Day will not be provided a way to vote the correct ballot at that location, despite a new state rule, under an Arizona Supreme Court ruling. In an emergency ruling issued October 25, the court determined it is too late to force the county to follow the rule, which Secretary of State Adrian Fontes created in December 2023. It requires Arizona counties that assign voters to a specific polling place make it possible for voters to cast the correct ballot, even if they go to a site other than the one to which they’ve been assigned. Chief Justice Ann Scott Timmer wrote that the Supreme Court would uphold the lower court decision, which said that requiring the county to follow the rule now would create “unacceptable risk of chaos, uncertainty, and confusion.” “Indeed, early voting has already begun,” Timmer wrote. Fontes’ office had filed suit to force the county to comply in time for the Nov. 5 election. Instead, Pinal County will be able to continue its practice of telling voters to go to the correct location, or to cast a provisional ballot that will likely be rejected. Arizona law requires county officials to reject ballots if the voter casts a ballot style that’s not for their precinct. The ruling puts Pinal County’s voters at a disadvantage, because all other counties in the state are either following the rule or using a different voting model where voters are not assigned a polling place and can access the correct ballot at any location in their county.
In another case, Fontes is asking Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Scott Blane not to release information about the 220,000 voters who may not have provided proof of citizenship due to a flaw in the way Arizona’s voter registration system pulls information from the state’s driver’s license database. The issue may have allowed some of those people to register to vote in all state and local elections, even though they did not provide the proof of citizenship required by Arizona law. The records are being sought by a Republican-leaning voter education group represented by attorneys with ties to former President Donald Trump. Fontes, whose office denied the group’s records request, told Blane his office still doesn’t have a full, verifiable list of voters affected by the glitch, which originated in the driver’s license database. That database is managed by the Department of Transportation’s Motor Vehicles Division, not the Secretary of State’s Office. “It would be virtually impossible for us to be able to do what the plaintiffs are asking us to do. A, because we don’t have control; B, we don’t have a list; C, we don’t have the resources; and D, I’m scared to death for my voters,” Fontes said.
Phoenix police have arrested 35-year-old Dieter Klofkorn for allegedly setting fire to a United States Postal Service mailbox in Phoenix on October 24, damaging several ballots dropped in the box, ahead of the November election. Police arrested Klofkorn on an unrelated warrant, and said in a press release that, during an interview, he admitted to setting the fire in a mailbox at the Osborn Post Office near the intersection of 7th Avenue and Indian School Road. Klofkorn told police that his actions were not politically motivated, and that he set the fire so he would be arrested and taken to jail, according to police. “Any attack that strikes at our democratic process carries criminal consequences,” Secretary of State Adrian Fontes said in a written statement. “Ballot abuse is a felony in Arizona, and mailbox vandalism is a federal crime.” Maricopa County Recorder Stephen Richer said in a statement that his office is waiting on details from law enforcement about the condition of ballots that were contained in the mailbox at the time of the fire. Ballots that were inside the mailbox but were undamaged will be treated normally, according to the Recorder’s Office. If elections officials can discern who any damaged ballots belong to, they will contact that voter.
Florida: The Florida Supreme Court could decide a legal dispute stemming from a move by Gov. Ron DeSantis and other state officials in 2022 to target alleged voter fraud by convicted felons. Defense attorneys filed a notice October 23 that is a first step in asking the Supreme Court to decide whether charges should proceed against Terry Hubbard, who was one of 20 convicted felons accused of registering and voting when ineligible. Charges against the convicted felons were announced in August 2022, less than three months before a general election that included DeSantis winning another term. DeSantis and other Republican leaders in recent years have made a major issue of trying to stop what they say is voter fraud. The dispute in the Hubbard case centers on whether the statewide prosecutor’s office had authority to file charges against him. A Broward County circuit judge dismissed the case because he said the alleged wrongdoing occurred in one judicial circuit and that the statewide prosecutor only had jurisdiction in cases involving multiple circuits. But a panel of the 4th District Court of Appeal in July overturned that ruling and said charges against Hubbard should move forward. The appeals court last month declined a request for a rehearing, but it took a step known as certifying a “question of great public importance” to the Supreme Court. It said the question is whether the Florida Constitution and a state law “permit the Office of the Statewide Prosecutor to prosecute crimes relating to registering and/or voting in a statewide election.” The state has argued that the alleged voting crimes involved two judicial circuits. That is because Hubbard filled out voter-registration applications in Broward County and the information was transmitted to the Department of State in Leon County.
Georgia: Julie Adams, a member of the election board in Fulton County, is appealing a judge’s order that she and other election leaders in the state’s most populous county must vote to certify results by the deadline set in law. Adams filed a lawsuit seeking a declaration that her duties as an election board member were discretionary and that she is entitled to “full access” to “election materials.” Fulton County Superior Court Judge Robert McBurney ruled this month that “no election superintendent (or member of a board of elections and registration) may refuse to certify or abstain from certifying election results under any circumstance.” Adams filed a notice of appeal Wednesday to the Georgia Court of Appeals over the part of McBurney’s order that says she “is required to vote in favor of certifying the election results by the deadline,” according to the filing. She also disputes McBurney’s assertion that the appropriate venue for her to voice concerns is an election challenge in the courts. Georgia law says county election superintendents — generally multi member boards — shall certify election results by 5 p.m. on the Monday after an election, or the Tuesday after if Monday is a holiday, as it is this year. That puts this year’s general election deadline at Nov. 12.
Indiana: Larry L. Savage Jr., a former Republican candidate running for an Indiana seat in the U.S. House of Representatives has been arrested and charged with stealing several election ballots during a recent voting machine test. Savage was arrested by Madison County authorities and charged with destroying/misplacing a ballot and theft. He has since been released on a $500 cash bond. The charges filed against Savage stem from an incident on Oct. 3 in which two election ballots went missing at the Madison County Government Center during testing of the local voting machines. Court documents show county officials began testing voting machines at 10 a.m. on Oct. 3, an event open to the public. Several citizens attended the tests and were allowed to run “test” ballots through the machines assigned to their county. Despite being marked “test,” the ballots were still officially tracked and counted by the State and included real candidate names as well as differing votes. After testing, officials found one straight-Republican ballot and one write-in ballot were missing. A review of security footage, which was subsequently being live-streamed online, showed Savage handling the two missing ballots. He can also be heard confirming with an election official that these are “absolutely, totally real ballots.” In the video Savage can be seen looking around the room before folding up two ballots and putting them in his sweatshirt pocket. Savage reportedly greeted officers at his front door and admitted to taking the ballots before they even finished reading the warrant. “You talking about the ballot the lady told me I could take,” Savage said. “I got the paper you’re talking about. I just rolled it up and put it in my pocket. I wasn’t trying to steal from nobody.”
Michigan: Prosecutors lost a final appeal October 25 in the case of a Michigan election worker who put a USB flash drive into an electronic poll book and downloaded the names of voters in 2022. The Michigan Supreme Court declined to take an appeal. The decision means a state appeals court ruling will stand and the case against James Holkeboer will be dismissed. Holkeboer was charged with election fraud in Kent County. The appeals court, however, said his conduct was improper but not a crime. “The prosecution had to demonstrate that Holkeboer fraudulently removed or secreted the election list of voters such that the information was no longer available or altered,” the appeals court said in April. “Here, no evidence was presented that election information was altered or made unavailable” to election officials, the court said. Holkeboer’s acts did not affect the results of the 2022 primary election. He was working at a polling place in Gaines Township, south of Grand Rapids, for the first time.
A 19-year-old University of Michigan student from China faces felony charges in Michigan after he allegedly cast a ballot at an Ann Arbor polling place over the weekend, state and local officials announced this week. He could face up to nine years in prison if found guilty. Only U.S. citizens are eligible to vote in federal and state elections. In a joint statement, Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson and Washtenaw County Prosecutor Eli Savit said that a local clerk referred the voter to law enforcement, who then investigated. In her own release, Attorney General Dana Nessel said her office was conducting a parallel investigation. “Let this be clear: Voting records are public — any noncitizen who attempts to vote fraudulently in Michigan will be exposing themselves to great risk and will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law,” Benson and Savit said in their statement.
Minnesota: The Minnesota Supreme Court said Hennepin County has to directly reach out to people on a political party’s list of potential election judges to fill absentee ballot boards overseeing early voting, rather than rely on cities to contact them. State law requires a bipartisan balance of Republican and Democratic Party election judges to oversee voting at polling places on Election Day and processing of absentee ballots at a county elections office. These boards verify information on the signature envelopes that absentee ballots are returned in, and review new voter registrations submitted with ballots. Republicans and the Minnesota Voters Alliance filed a petition Oct. 16 to the state Supreme Court, which handles election-related challenges, arguing Hennepin County incorrectly bypassed a list of 1,500 potential GOP election judges for the absentee ballot board. In response to the state Supreme Court ruling released Tuesday, Hennepin County Auditor Daniel Rogan said they emailed all of the people on the Republican list Wednesday to see if they want to serve as election judges on the absentee ballot board.
Danielle Christine Miller, 40, of Nashwauk faces three felony charges after allegedly attempting to vote twice in the general election. Miller admitted to filling out and submitting an absentee ballot for her mother, who died in August. The fraudulent submission was flagged by election officials before it could be counted. “The defendant admitted her deceased mother was an avid Donald Trump supporter and had wanted to vote for Trump in this election but had passed shortly before the absentee ballots were received,” according to the complaint filed last week in State District Court. The Itasca County Auditor’s Office said it received sealed ballot envelopes containing signatures for Miller and her mother, Rose Marie Javorina, on Oct. 7. But Javorina had died Aug. 31, according to the Minnesota Vital Statistics death report, so the matter was referred to the Itasca County Sheriff’s Office.
Mississippi: The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled October 25 that a Mississippi law allowing mail-in ballots to be counted if they are postmarked before Election Day — but received up to five days after Election Day — is preempted by federal law. The ruling by the 5th Circuit does not have any immediate impact on the current election because the three-judge panel declined to issue an injunction blocking the counting of votes, and sent the case back to the lower court for further action. It does, however, pave the way for a possible challenge that could go up to the U.S. Supreme Court, which could have ramifications for states that do allow ballots postmarked before Election Day to be counted. The appeals court ruling says that no such ballots should be counted. “Congress statutorily designated a singular ‘day for the election’ of members of Congress and the appointment of presidential electors,” the three-judge panel wrote in its opinion. “Text, precedent, and historical practice confirm this ‘day for the election’ is the day by which ballots must be both cast by voters and received by state officials.” The decision by Judges James Ho, Kyle Duncan and Andrew Oldham notes that as of November 2022, 18 states and the District of Columbia allow post-election receipt of ballots — and suggests they should not be allowed to do so. “Federal law requires voters to take timely steps to vote by Election Day. And federal law does not permit the State of Mississippi to extend the period for voting by one day, five days, or 100 days,” the ruling said.
Nevada: The Nevada Supreme Court upheld a lower court’s decision that election offices should accept and count mail ballots received after Election Day. Nevada state law specifies that mail ballots without postmarks or with illegible postmarks should be accepted and counted if they are received by county election offices up to three days after Election Day. (Mail ballots postmarked by Election Day should be accepted and counted if received by county election officials up to four days after Election Day.) The Republican National Committee and former President Donald Trump’s reelection campaign filed a lawsuit in May challenging the law on non-postmarked ballots received after Election Day. They sought an injunction to prevent the counting of these ballots in the upcoming general election. Their request for an injunction was denied in early August, and they appealed to the state’s high court. The Nevada Supreme Court noted in its opinion, which was posted by Democracy Docket, that the RNC identified 24 non-postmarked mail ballots that were received by Clark County after this year’s June primary election day, but they provided no evidence regarding the partisan lean of those ballots. The lack of a postmark “occurs as the result of random postal service operations,” the court noted.
North Carolina: A section of the voter purge case Republicans wanted moved back to North Carolina state courts must remain in federal court, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled this week. The decision was a victory for the state Board of Elections, which had appealed a federal judge’s order to send part of the voter purge case back to state court. When it filed the lawsuit in late August, the RNC asked the court to require the state Board of Elections to come up with a plan to remove 225,000 voters from the rolls by Sept. 6, even though federal law prohibits systematic removal of voters within 90 days of an election. Alternatively, the RNC wants to force those voters to submit provisional ballots. The state Board of Elections won a dismissal of part of the RNC lawsuit earlier this month. But the same federal judge sent part of the case back to state court. The state Board argued that federal laws are at the heart of the RNC lawsuit, so the case should be decided in federal court. The Appeals Court held a hearing this week. The judges agreed with the state election board’s position. “Plaintiffs’ Count Two claim may come cloaked in state constitutional garb, but it raises only federal statutory questions,” the court order says. The order sends the case back to federal district court. The court did not weigh in on whether Republicans’ request would violate the federal law and its 90 day “quiet period.” But the fact that the federal law could prevent Republicans from winning the result they’re seeking “only serves to bolster the conclusion that Plaintiffs’ claims necessarily raise an issue of federal law.”
The State Court of Appeals on October 28 turned back Republicans’ attempt to have the state set aside ballots from some citizens living overseas and reject some of their registration forms. In doing so, the Appeals Court upheld a trial court judge’s decision denying Republicans’ request for a restraining order. The Republican National Committee, the North Carolina Republican Party, and two voters sued the state Board of Elections claiming that people living overseas who are ineligible to vote are allowed to register. In his order denying GOP’s request, Superior Court Judge John W. Smith wrote that the statute Republicans claim is being misinterpreted was adopted in 2011 with support from both parties and had not been challenged until this suit was filed. Republicans presented no evidence of fraud, the judge wrote. “Plaintiffs concede and the court finds that Plaintiffs have not presented any evidence of even a single specific instance of any registrant unlawfully availing themselves of the statutory provision,” Smith wrote. “All of the factual evidence presented to this court shows that Defendants have not and will not knowingly allow a non-resident who does not fall within the statutory exception to register or vote in our state elections.”
North Carolina’s five living former governors filed paperwork this week in the Court of Appeals seeking leave to submit a friend-of-the-court brief supporting Gov. Roy Cooper’s legal challenge to a law that would shift the power to appoint state and county election boards to the General Assembly Republicans Jim Martin and Pat McCrory joined Democrats Mike Easley, Bev Perdue and Jim Hunt to support the filing. This is the second time this month that the former governors have backed Cooper, who is also battling GOP legislative leaders over appointments to seven other state boards and commissions. “The five living former Governors of North Carolina have a strong interest in this case: their interest in preserving the executive power, status, and dignity that the Constitution confers on the Office of the Governor,” lawyers for the former governors wrote in a court filing Tuesday. In March, a three-judge panel sided unanimously with Cooper, ruling that the Republican-controlled legislature unlawfully tried to seize from the governor the power to appoint members of the state Board of Elections and shift it to the legislature. Currently, governors appoint all five members, with three coming from the governor’s party. The new law would allow legislative leaders from both parties to appoint a board consisting of four Republicans and four Democrats. Membership on county boards of elections would shrink from five to four, with two members appointed by Republican legislators and two by Democrats. The former governors said their interest in the case is nonpartisan.
Ohio: The Ohio Supreme Court ruled that Republican Attorney General Dave Yost overstepped his authority by rejecting a voting-related amendment’s ballot petition solely because he objected to the title. In a unanimous decision, the court sided with a coalition of civil rights organizations behind the “Ohio Voters Bill of Rights” and ordered Yost to revisit his January decision within 10 days. Justices stopped short of ordering Yost to advance the constitutional amendment directly to the state Ballot Board, however, which is what plaintiffs had asked. Instead, they directed him to “perform his duty” and review the coalition’s summary of the issue for fairness and accuracy. The coalition’s members had initially hoped to place the measure on this year’s ballot. The package of election law changes responded to Ohio’s enactment last year of tougher photo ID requirements, shortened windows after Election Day for returning and curing ballots and other voting changes. The groups sued after Yost’s second rejection of their certification petition, whose title he called “highly misleading and misrepresentative” of the measure’s contents. Yost said in his rejection letter that “recent authority from the Ohio Supreme Court” had given him the ability to review petition headings, in addition to reviewing the bodies of summaries as he traditionally has. Yost pointed to the high court’s decision in a legal dispute last year over the title that appeared on petitions for a local drag ban. The court said he has no such authority under Ohio law.
The ACLU asked a court October 24 to block Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose (R) from requiring voters to show naturalization papers if their citizenship status is challenged at a polling place in violation of a decades-old ruling. “Requiring naturalized citizens to bring additional documentation to verify their eligibility to vote is not only burdensome and discriminatory, it’s unlawful,” Freda Levenson, legal director of the ACLU of Ohio, said in a statement. In a 2006 federal district court order, Judge Christopher Boyko struck down a state law allowing poll workers to demand naturalized citizens show documentary proof of citizenship before permitting them to vote and prohibited the Ohio secretary of state from enforcing this requirement. Since this court order, the form that Ohio poll workers use when challenging a voter’s eligibility states that if a voter answers yes to the question of whether they are a U.S. citizen, then they can cast a regular ballot. The ACLU and the Brennan Center for Justice filed an emergency motion with the court on behalf of the plaintiffs in the 2006 case, asking Boyko to enforce his previous ruling and order LaRose to revoke his revised form and return to the previous version that complied with the court order. “After nearly 20 years of compliance with the federal injunction, Secretary LaRose suddenly decided to defy the injunction and impose an 11th-hour requirement forcing naturalized citizens to produce these papers,” Levenson said. “We are hurrying back to the court, asking it to enforce its long-standing order.”
In another noncitizens case, LaRose filed suit against the federal government last week. LaRose says the Department of Homeland Security has failed to give Ohio access to federal citizenship verification records needed to prevent those who are not U.S. citizens from voting. LaRose says the state can use the federal Systematic Alien Verification and Entitlements (SAVE) database to verify citizenship, but says the Biden Administration is denying Ohio access to three other federal databases. “The federal government is required to make this data available, and I believe we’ll win this case and be able to access that citizenship data we need to verify only American citizens are voting,” LaRose said. LaRose acknowledges this likely will not impact this November’s election but says it could play a role in future ones. The lawsuit comes as LaRose works to remove non-citizens from the voter rolls and have some prosecuted for election fraud.
Oregon: Judicial Watch has filed a lawsuit against Oregon and Secretary of State Lavonne Griffin-Valade claiming improper maintenance of Oregon’s voter lists. The group alleges in the suit filed October 23 in Oregon’s Eugene division of the U.S. District Court that Oregon is violating the National Voter Registration, or “Motor Voter,” Act by not removing ineligible voters from registration lists. A spokesperson for the secretary of state said the lawsuit filed on behalf of two individuals and the Constitution Party of Oregon misinterprets Oregon law and that inactive voters do not receive ballots. The act requires states to remove someone who has changed addresses if they have not responded to a written notice or voted in the past two elections. A person may become ineligible because they have moved or died. The lawsuit said 19 counties in Oregon did not list any of these specific removals between November 2020 and November 2022, while an additional 10 counties reported fewer than 11 removals in the same period. “There is no possible way these counties can be conducting a general program that makes a reasonable effort to cancel the registrations of voters who have become ineligible because of a change of residence while removing so few registrations under Section 8(d)(1)(B),” Judicial Watch’s filing said.
Pennsylvania: The Republican National Committee and the Republican Party of Pennsylvania have asked the Pennsylvania Supreme Court to delay a ruling that could affect thousands of voters next month while it asks the U.S. Supreme Court to hear an appeal. The state Supreme Court ruled October 23 that the election code requires county election officials to allow voters to cast a provisional ballot if their mail-in ballot is rejected and have the provisional ballot counted as long as there are no additional disqualifying problems. In a filing October 25, the RNC and Pennsylvania Republican Party argued that the ruling goes against the court’s own admonition against changing voting rules while an election is in progress. The state Supreme Court on Oct. 5 denied requests in two other cases to resolve questions about the commonwealth’s vote-by-mail law in the final few weeks before the Nov. 5 presidential election. It said the risk of confusing voters with a change in voting rules so close to the election was too great. “This Court should heed its statement from earlier this month and refrain from “substantial[ly] alter[ing]” the rules and procedures governing county boards’ counting of ballots in the current election,” the RNC and state Republican party’s filing Friday said. Republicans on Monday asked the U.S. Supreme Court for an emergency order in Pennsylvania that could result in thousands of votes not being counted in this year’s election in the battleground state.
U.S. District Judge Christopher Conner tossed out a Republican lawsuit that sought to segregate overseas ballots in Pennsylvania for additional vetting. Conner said that the challengers to Pennsylvania’s policies for overseas ballots filed by GOP members of the Pennsylvania congressional delegation and an outside group came too late and that it was too close to the election for a court to intervene. The overseas vote has long been viewed as sacrosanct because of its connection to the military vote, and the Pennsylvania lawsuit – which would have jeopardized the ballots of service people abroad – drew a sharp backlash. Conner said that the court order that Republicans were asking for was a “nonstarter.” “An injunction at this late hour would upend the Commonwealth’s carefully laid election administration procedures to the detriment of untold thousands of voters, to say nothing of the state and county administrators who would be expected to implement these new procedures on top of their current duties,” Conner, who was appointed by President George W. Bush, said. “Plaintiffs delayed too long to file their action, they lack standing, they have failed to join indispensable parties, and they have failed to articulate a viable cause of action,” Conner added. He cited other procedural issues with Republicans’ lawsuit as well.
In a 3-2 ruling the state’s Commonwealth Court said that Philadelphia must count mail ballots from the September special elections that were submitted with return envelopes that voters incorrectly dated or failed to date, a state appellate court ruled Wednesday in a decision that doesn’t explicitly apply to the November general election. The ruling said a local Philadelphia court got it right when it said rejecting the ballots violated the state constitution. “We hold that the trial court did not err in ordering the County Board to count the 69 undated and incorrectly dated absentee and mail-in ballots cast in the [special elections] on the basis that not counting those ballots violates the free and equal elections clause of the Pennsylvania Constitution,” Judge Ellen Ceisler wrote for the majority. In a footnote, Ciesler wrote that the case “relates to a special election that has already occurred, and not the 2024 general election.” In a dissenting opinion, Judge Matthew Wolf said the majority decision risked “causing confusion on the eve of the 2024 General Election.” Judge Patricia McCullough raised the same concern in a separate dissent.
The Pennsylvania Democratic Party is seeking a preliminary injunction against the Erie County Board of Elections over problems with mail ballots that it alleges could be affecting up to 20,000 voters. The issues in Erie began with an Ohio-based third-party vendor, ElectionIQ, that the county contracts with to print and mail its mail ballots, given the volume of requests for mail ballots the county has received for the upcoming election. A voter notified the Erie elections board and the county Voter Registration Office on Oct. 18 that they had received two mail ballots, one with their correct information and a second with a different voter’s name and address on the return envelope. A software failure caused ElectionIQ to send duplicate ballots that went into incorrect envelopes. The county estimated that about 300 people received duplicate or incorrect ballots, and the U.S. Postal Service has “been unable to account for,” another 1,800 mail ballots, according to the lawsuit, which the county says were never mailed by ElectionIQ. The state Democratic Party claims in its filing that it “has been made aware by its registered party members of numerous instances where a voter requested a mail-in ballot weeks ago but has still not received their ballot.”
Judge Jeffrey Trauger agreed to extend an in-person voting option in a suburban Philadelphia county where long lines on the final day led to complaints voters were being disenfranchised by an unprepared election office. Trauger said in a one-page order that Bucks County voters who want to apply for an early mail ballot now have until Friday. The narrowly divided county, which is led by Democrats, is often seen as a political bellwether. The lawsuit sought a one-day extension, through Wednesday at 5 p.m., for Bucks County voters to apply in person for a mail-in ballot, a method referred to as on-demand mail voting in Pennsylvania. The judge’s order permits applications through the close of business on Friday. Bucks County officials said they’re “pleased to be able to offer additional days for those who are still seeking to vote on-demand.”
State House candidate Jamie Walsh sued Luzerne County and its elections board October 25, claiming officials have taken too long to process voter registration and mail-in ballot applications. Walsh’s suit comes before a key deadline has even passed: Voters have until 5 p.m. October 29 to submit requests for mail-in ballots. The suit alleges the county deliberately chose “to not timely process the approximately 2,500 additional new applications for voter registration” received before the Oct. 21 registration deadline. Luzerne County Manager Romilda Crocamo emailed county officials Friday to inform them voter registration processing is complete.
Common Pleas Court Judge Jack Whelan has denied an application for an emergency injunction against Delaware County using Hart ballot scanners in the upcoming 2024 General Election because they include software that, despite the petitioners’ claims, was always supposed to be there. “The complaints in this lawsuit were baseless, and we think this ruling reflects how the staff works to provide equipment and trained poll workers to ensure an accurate and fair election,” Delaware County Elections Director Jim Allen said in a release. “Our team has conducted numerous audits and recounts, all of which have verified the accuracy of the results.”
Circuit Court Judge Daniel Coble ruled that nearly 1,900 teens who tried to register to vote through the state Department of Motor Vehicles cannot be added to the voter rolls before the election. The request came from an American Civil Liberties Union lawsuit against the DMV and the State Election Commission, filed on Tuesday. The lawsuit said 17-year-olds who would turn 18 by Election Day, and therefore were eligible to vote, had been automatically denied when trying to register to vote through the DMV and should be given an opportunity to vote this election. Coble wrote that he could not provide any solution without overstepping the authority of the court, but also declined to dismiss the case. “This Court finds that the relief sought by (the ACLU) is too drastic and would likely violate the separation of powers doctrine,” Coble wrote in a brief order filed just before 4 p.m. “There is no effectual relief that this Court could grant and even if it attempted to, the relief sought would create disorder in the voting system.”
: Jesse Lutzenberger, 63, of Bexar County, was arrested on suspicion of injury to an elderly person, a felony, after he allegedly assaulted a poll worker at a San Antonio-area vote center late on October 24. According to Votebeat, the suspect walked into the polling location, wearing a Make America Great Again hat. The poll worker, 69, asked Lutzenberger to remove the hat, which he did, officials said. Lutzenberger went on to cast his ballot. While still inside the polling location, Lutzenberger put the hat back on as he walked toward the door. The poll worker approached him to tell him that was unacceptable and then began to escort him out as they were approaching the doors of the location. Bexar County Sheriff Javier Salazar said a surveillance video showed Lutzenberger “throw an arm back toward the victim,” he said. “The victim seemed to push off of the suspect. At that point, the suspect then turned and threw several punches right at the face of the victim.” Lutzenberger bonded out of jail late on October 25.
The Travis County Republican Party sued Travis County Clerk Dyana Limon-Mercado over an imbalance in poll workers at local voting sites, according to a press release and court filing. The filing claimed the TCRP submitted the names of “over 900” qualified, Republican volunteers to the county clerk in June. It also alleged only 72 Republicans were selected as poll workers, just 24% of the total 306 clerks, and with 32 Republicans who were not on the TCRP’s list. “It is totally unacceptable that large portions of our county have no Republican election judges assigned, despite our providing far more than the number of available workers needed,” said TCRP chair Matt Mackowiak in the press release. Limon-Mercado’s office said it was aware of the lawsuit and was working with the Travis County Attorney to file a response. “Our office remains committed to administering an election that is accessible to all eligible voters,” said a spokesperson for the clerk’s office. “This is made possible through the dedication of our full-time staff and temporary election workers. We appreciate their hard work and service to Travis County.”
A lawsuit filed by conservative activist and GOP megadonor Steven Hotze alleges the Harris County voter registration roll contains “tens of thousands” of ineligible voters. The lawsuit, in part, seeks to remove ineligible voters from the registration roll. But under the details of a federal law, a 90 day deadline was already missed to remove those names ahead of the Nov. 5 election. “Because of the ill-advised and illegal procedure implemented by [Bennett], plaintiffs and their supporting voters in the Nov. 5, 2024 General Election are susceptible to having their votes totally disenfranchised and/or diluted in violation of the Texas Election Code,” according to the lawsuit. The lawsuit asserts that the registration roll includes voters “who have moved out of Harris County, voters who have died, voters who are felons, voters who have registered at post office or private mail boxes with commercial mail receiving agencies, scores of voters who are not related to each other but have registered at the same address, voters who have registered at a commercial address and do not reside there and voters who claim to live on vacant [properties.”
U.S. Virgin Islands: On the last day of early voting for the 2024 General Election, the dispute between top V.I. election officials advanced toward a possible court hearing. A civil lawsuit filed by Supervisor of Elections Caroline Fawkes seeks to prevent the board from overturning a prior decision about a candidate’s eligibility. On Monday the Justice Department filed a Notice of Limited Appearance for Assistant Attorney General Christopher Timmons. If the court grants its approval Timmons will serve the board by challenging Fawkes’ jurisdiction and by opposing the motion for the restraining order. Attorney General Gordon Rhea filed the notice in response to a request submitted last week by Board Chairwoman Alecia Wells. If Fawkes’ motion survives the jurisdictional challenge, the next likely step will be a hearing before Judge Yvette Ross-Edwards in the Superior Court of St. Croix. No scheduled hearings have appeared on the court docket so far.
Virginia: On October 25, U.S. District Judge Patricia Giles ordered Virginia to restore more than 1,600 voter registrations that she said were illegally purged in the last two months in an effort to stop noncitizens from voting. Giles granted an injunction request brought against Virginia election officials by the Justice Department, which claimed the voter registrations were wrongly canceled during a 90-day quiet period ahead of the November election that restricts states from making large-scale changes to their voter rolls. In issuing her ruling, Giles bristled at the suggestion she was restoring the voting rights of noncitizens. She said the state lacked proof that the purged voters were noncitizens but went ahead and canceled their registrations anyway in violation of federal law. “I’m not dealing with beliefs,” she told a lawyer for Virginia when he again referred to those stricken from the rolls as noncitizens. “I’m dealing with evidence.” On Sunday night, following an appeal from the state, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit upheld the Friday ruling. The Virginia attorney general filed an appeal with the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday. The appeal filed to the Supreme Court asks the high court to intervene by Tuesday. Without any intervention, the injunction issued last week by Giles requires Virginia to notify affect voters and local registrars by Wednesday of the restorations she ordered. Miyares’ filing argues that requiring Virginia to restore the voter registrations of those who have been identified as noncitizens is a “violation of Virginia law and common sense.” The Supreme Court’s conservative majority left in place the purge of voter registrations. The high court, over the dissents of the three liberal justices, granted an emergency appeal from Virginia’s Republican administration led by Gov. Glenn Youngkin. The court provided no rationale for its action, which is typical in emergency appeals.
A jury has found Richardson Carter Bell, 67, not guilty of attempted illegal voting in a one-day trial this week, accepting the man’s claim that he was only trying to test the election system for voter fraud when he asked to vote a second time in local elections last year. Bell admitted to police that he voted early at the Nelson County registrar’s office on Nov. 4, 2023 — then lined up with voters at his local polling place on Election Day three days later, presenting his driver’s license at the check-in table and confirming his name and address to the poll worker. “I was messing [with them] to see if they were going to let me vote again, to see what kind of fraud is going on,” Bell told Virginia State Police investigators who later questioned him in a recorded interview played for jurors in Nelson County Circuit Court.
Wisconsin: A lawsuit seeking last-minute changes to Wisconsin’s voter registration list has been dismissed by a Milwaukee County judge. The challenge, filed weeks before election day, alleged more than 140,000 people on the voter rolls no longer reside at the addresses they listed while registering to vote. The suit was filed Sept. 30 by attorney Dan Eastman on behalf of three Milwaukee residents. In the suit filed last month, the plaintiffs claimed 143,742 people listed as active on Wisconsin’s registration list “appear to be invalid” based on cross references with U.S. Postal Service data. Of those, the suit alleges 56,336 “anomalous registrations” are in Milwaukee. Eastman was seeking a court order forcing the Milwaukee Elections Commission and Wisconsin Elections Commission to contact each of the individuals and deactivate the voter registrations of anyone who did not respond within 30 days. On Oct. 22, the Milwaukee Elections Commission filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit. The commission argued the plaintiffs should have first filed their complaint with the state elections commission. In response, the plaintiffs argued the Wisconsin Supreme Court has ruled that complaints don’t need to be filed with the state elections commission before litigation is filed. Milwaukee County Circuit Court Judge Timothy Witkowiak dismissed Eastman’s suit Monday.
NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote! Michael H. Drucker
No comments:
Post a Comment