Electionline Weekly November-14-2024

Ballot Measures, Legislation & Rulemaking

Alabama: Alabama Rep. Thomas Jackson, D-Thomasville, has pre-filed a bill that would allow registered voters to vote prior to election day. This bill would require each county to provide at least one early voting center to be open during the week immediately preceding election day, according to its text. It specifies that the centers cannot allow people to vote less than four days or more than six days during the one-week period immediately preceding election day. On weekdays and Saturdays, the centers would be open from 9am to 5pm and on Sundays, they would be open from 1pm to 5pm If the governing body of a county opts to establish more than one early voting center, the bill says officials will have the sole authority to configure the centers’ boundaries. County officials will also control what days the centers are open, provided they allow people to vote between four and six days prior to election day. “I think we need to see what other states are doing,” said Rep. Steve Clouse, R-Ozark, a former General Fund chairman in the Alabama House, advocating for a study or an analysis of how much early voting costs elsewhere.

Alaska: Legislators in Alaska will tackle election reform when they convene in January. “…I’d like to see us deal with elections issues early on so we don’t wait until the last minute,” said Sen. Gary Stevens, R-Kodiak This spring, a major elections reform bill died on the last day of the legislative session. The same thing happened with another elections reform bill two years ago. “One of the things I’ve heard about is election reform,” said Sen. Bill Wielechowski, D-Anchorage and a member of the coalition. “There’s just a recognition that we have a number of things that need to be fixed,” he said, mentioning signature verification on absentee ballots, witness signatures on those ballots, and adding the ability for voters to “cure,” or fix, errors that would otherwise disqualify their votes. “I think making it easier for people to vote — it’s not a Democratic or Republican issue,” he said.

Maine Ballot Measure: Voter ID for ME dispatched hundreds of volunteers across the state to polling places on November 5 to explain to voters their ideas for voter ID ballot measure and to gather signatures. The organizers of a referendum say they’ve gathered enough signatures to get the question before voters in a November 2025 referendum. “We’re looking forward to passing this popular initiative next year,” said Alex Titcomb, the lead petitioner on the effort. He said supporters have collected more than 165,000 signatures, including over 125,000 on Election Day alone, and will submit them to the Maine Department of the Secretary of State for review and certification. The proposal would require people to present a photo ID at the polls or when requesting an absentee ballot, unless they have a religious exemption to being photographed. Voters without a photo ID could cast a provisional ballot, which would be counted if they produce a photo ID within four days of the election. It would also require the secretary of state to provide free state nondriver IDs to people who need them. Enacting a statewide voter ID requirement has been proposed repeatedly by Republicans in the Maine Legislature in recent years, but has been blocked by Democrats, who have criticized the costs of such a program and warned that the new requirement would create long lines at the polls and effectively discourage voting.

Michigan: State Rep. Penelope Tsernoglou, D-East Lansing, introduced four election-related bills: HB 6052 would allow clerks to use on-demand ballot printing for same-day registration voters in a clerk’s office or in election day voting centers. It would also allow on-demand ballot printing for ballots printed in a language other than English so that clerks could avoid having to pre-print large numbers of non-English ballots. HB 6053 would adjust the deadline for most election-related Michigan lawsuits from 28 days before Election Day to 45 days beforehand. The rationale behind this, Tsernoglou said, is to prevent needless administrative disruptions to the election process when absentee ballots have already been sent out. The bill still allows for lawsuits to be filed during this timeframe, but only when there is a compelling reason and with a higher burden of proof placed on the filer. HB 6054 and 6055 propose multiple amendments to election administrative procedures and early voting provisions, including requiring clerks to notify the Michigan Bureau of Elections of early voting site decisions at least 50 days before the site opens for polling. The bills would also outline the procedures for early voting agreements and withdrawals among municipalities and counties, clarify rules for absentee ballot processing, require county clerks to conduct unofficial counts for early unofficial returns, and amend sentencing guidelines provisions in the state’s criminal law procedure, among other changes.

Gun owners would be banned from openly carrying their firearms to Michigan election locations under bills headed to the desk of Gov. Gretchen Whitmer for likely signature. House Democrats gave final passage to the legislation Wednesday in a series of 56-53 party-line votes, approving changes made by the state Senate in February. Democrats have attempted to ban guns at polling locations since at least 2020, when Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson tried to do so on her own. She was sued by gun rights groups who argued she was violating their Second Amendment rights. Under the legislation approved this week, a person could not bring a firearm in or within 100 feet of a voting location while polls are open on Election Day, unless they carried their weapon concealed and had a permit to do so. The same rules would apply to early voting locations, as well as absentee ballot drop boxes, for the 40 days prior to an election. During that 40-day window, a person could not bring their gun into, or within 100 feet of, a city or township clerk’s office or their satellite locations. Violations could result in a $100 fine, up to 90 days in jail, or both. House lawmakers signed off on several provisions the state Senate had added to the bills in February, including allowing gun owners to keep their weapons in their cars or have their weapons on hand if visiting someone living within 100 feet of a drop box or polling location. Off-duty police officers would also be included in the list of individuals allowed to carry a firearm in the vicinity of election activity.

Ohio: Sens. Theresa Gavarone (R- Bowling Green) and Andrew Brenner (R-Powell), introduced Senate Bill 324 the day after Election Day that would prohibit ballot drop boxes, impose citizenship verification requirements on voters, and other new rules. The Legislative Service Commission hasn’t yet analyzed the 149-page bill, but Gavarone said she has distributed it to Ohio’s 88 county election directors. Its provisions include: Citizenship checks during voter registration and change of address; Prohibiting ballot drop boxes; Requiring petition circulators to identify themselves via badge as paid operatives; and Prescribing attestation forms for those dropping off others’ ballots. Gavarone was noncommittal when asked if she expects the legislation to pass during the lame duck session. At year’s end, any legislation not yet signed into law must restart the entire legislative process as new lawmakers take over.

Ohio Ballot Measure: State Attorney General Dave Yost announced his office certified petition summary language for a proposed amendment enshrining voter-friendly policies into the state constitution. His certification marks an early step in a long and cumbersome citizen-led constitutional amendment process. It comes after the Ohio Supreme Court unanimously swatted down his previous rejection of the amendment on the grounds that its title – “Ohio Voters Bill of Rights” – was misleading. The court ruled he had no authority to analyze the title, only the subject matter of the proposed amendment itself. Now the proposal goes to the Ohio Ballot Board – a state body controlled by Republicans – which must determine whether the proposal is limited only to one subject, as required by law. With the board’s approval, the organizers can begin gathering the roughly 413,000 signatures needed to place the matter on a statewide ballot for a simple majority vote. The voter bill of rights would have declared that voting is a “fundamental right” in Ohio, which triggers heightened judicial scrutiny of any laws that might infringe on that right. It also would enshrine voting hours, early voting, automatic voter registration via the Bureau of Motor Vehicles, online voter registration, same-day voter registration, loosened identification requirements to vote, allowances for more drop boxes and early voting locations, a requirement that election mail to come with prepaid postage, and others.

Virginia: The House Privileges and Elections Committee advanced a proposed constitutional amendment that would automatically restore the voting rights of ex-felons. HJ2, sponsored by Del. Elizabeth Bennett-Parker, D-Alexandria, seeks to automate the process of restoring voting rights to people convicted of felony crimes who have served their sentences. The proposal comes in response to a 2023 policy change implemented by Gov. Glenn Youngkin that requires people with felony convictions to proactively apply to regain their voting rights upon release from prison and is not automatically restoring rights for any group of offenders — a shift from Virginia’s three previous governors. Bennett-Parker told reporters that her amendment proposes automatic restoration of voting rights for individuals who have been released from incarceration, which she said would foster “a more just and bare” society. The committee backed HJ2 with a 12-9 party-line vote.

Legal Updates

Arizona: The Arizona Supreme Court declined to extend the deadline for voters to fix problems with mail-in ballots, a day after voter rights groups cited reports of delays in vote counting and in notification of voters with problem signatures. The court said Sunday that election officials in eight of the state’s 15 counties reported that all voters with “inconsistent signatures” had been properly notified and given an opportunity to respond. Arizona law calls for people who vote by mail to receive notice of problems such as a ballot signature that doesn’t match one on file and get a “reasonable” chance to correct it in a process known as “curing.” “The Court has no information to establish in fact that any such individuals did not have the benefit of ‘reasonable efforts’ to cure their ballots,” wrote Justice Bill Montgomery, who served as duty judge for the seven-member court. He noted that no responding county requested a time extension. “In short, there is no evidence of disenfranchisement before the Court,” the court order said. The American Civil Liberties Union and the Campaign Legal Center on Saturday named registrars in a petition asking for an emergency court order to extend the original 5 p.m. MST Sunday deadline by up to four days. Maricopa is the state’s most populous county and includes Phoenix. The groups said that as of Friday evening, more than 250,000 mail-in ballots had not yet been verified by signature, with the bulk of those in Maricopa County . They argued that tens of thousands of Arizona voters could be disenfranchised.

Illinois: The Cook County Circuit Court ruled this week to invalidate Evanston’s pilot ranked choice voting referendum, dismissing the action to implement RCV in the Evanston 2025 Consolidated Elections with prejudice. The court deemed the 2022 voter referendum to be “void” because it is not self-executing and stated that the Illinois Election Code prohibits ranked choice voting, adding that the Cook County Clerk does not have legal authority to certify voting machines and that the Clerk does not have authority to submit a voting system to the Illinois State Board of Elections. Evanston voters initially approved the referendum in the 2022 midterm election, becoming the first city in Illinois to adopt RCV. Nonprofit Reform for Illinois with retired attorney David Melton initially filed the action against the County Clerk Cedric Giles in July. According to the motion to dismiss, the plaintiffs alleged that Evanston’s home rule municipality authority authorized the implementation of ranked choice voting. City spokesperson Cynthia Vargas told The Daily that the city is reviewing the court’s ruling and is eyeing potential legal action to defend the city’s home rule authority.

Iowa: Irving Omar Ahumada Geronimo, 35, of Graettinger was arrested on two counts of election misconduct. He was charged on Oct. 31 with illegally registering to vote and voting on Nov. 2, 2021, in a Graettinger City Council and school board election. According to the criminal complaint, Greattinger fraudulently signed a voter registration form under oath attesting that he was a U.S. citizen and “fraudulently voted in that election knowing himself not to be qualified to do so.” First-degree election misconduct is a class D felony, punishable by up to five years in prison and a fine of $750 to $7,500. This is the second recent prosecution announced by Iowa Attorney General Brenna Bird’s office of a legal resident who is not a U.S. citizen accused of illegally casting a vote.

Kansas: The US Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit reversed and remanded a lower court ruling that allowed the organizations VoteAmerica and the Voter Participation Center (VPC) to send out mail-in ballot applications to Kansas voters with pre-filled information. The appeals court determined that the key legal issue in the case was “the level of scrutiny that should be employed” when examining freedom of speech and the Kansas statute. The district court had previously agreed with the plaintiffs’ argument that “strict scrutiny” should apply, meaning that the state would need to show that the “least restrictive means” were applied to further their interests. The court agreed with the plaintiffs that the statute is a content-based regulation, but the court found it should be subject to intermediate scrutiny since it is neutral in purpose or justification. This lower level of scrutiny only requires the government to show that its means were “substantially related” to their interests. The appeals court ultimately rejected the plaintiffs’ freedom of association claim but remitted the freedom of speech claim back to the district court, despite the defendants’ argument that free speech was not engaged. The court found the prefilled applications to be speech under the First Amendment in part because of the fact they have words on a page written by VPC, which indicates a strong presumption that free speech is engaged.

Michigan: Haoxiang Gao, a 19-year-old University of Michigan student from China, was arraigned November 8 in Washtenaw County District Court on charges that he voted illegally in the presidential election. The Michigan Secretary of State’s Office and the Washtenaw County Prosecutor’s Office announced on Oct. 30 that a student who wasn’t a U.S. citizen had cast a ballot at an early voting site in Ann Arbor. The announcement came six days before Election Day and drew the attention of national political figures, as there was no way for local election officials to prevent Gao’s ballot from being counted after it was entered into a tabulator. Michigan authorities didn’t identify Gao as the individual who allegedly cast the ballot until he was arraigned in the 15th District Court in Ann Arbor. Gao is facing felony charges of perjury — making a false statement on an affidavit for the purpose of securing voter registration — and of being an unauthorized elector who attempted to vote. The standard penalty for perjury in Michigan, the most serious of the two allegations, is up to 15 years in prison.

Mississippi: Pro-voter organizations have asked the full 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to reconsider a three-judge panel’s decision that invalidated a Mississippi law allowing election officials to count timely postmarked mail-in ballots for up to five business days after an election. The request follows an Oct. 25 ruling from a trio of Trump-appointed 5th Circuit judges who unanimously endorsed the Republican National Committee’s (RNC) argument that Mississippi’s five-day post-election ballot receipt deadline effectively “extended” Election Day in violation of federal law. A lower federal court had previously rejected the RNC’s legal bid, concluding that the state’s deadline — which was enacted in 2020 with bipartisan support — comports with federal election law and the U.S. Constitution. Although the 5th Circuit panel’s October ruling struck down the mail-in ballot receipt statute, it did not immediately require Mississippi to stop counting late received mail-in ballots for the 2024 election. Instead, the appellate judges sent the case back down to the district court for further proceedings, which have not yet commenced. In a petition filed Friday, two advocacy groups — Vet Voice Foundation and the Mississippi Alliance for Retired Americans — argued that the entire bench of active 5th Circuit judges should rehear the case and ultimately affirm the district court’s rejection of the RNC’s lawsuit. The groups underscored the importance of post-election ballot receipt deadlines in protecting overseas and military voters from disenfranchisement, while also noting that the practice of counting late-arriving ballots postmarked on or before Election Day is commonplace across the country.

Nevada: The American Center For Law and Justice (ACLJ) announced they filed an amicus brief in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, joining an appeal filed last May by Attorney and Republican National Committeewoman Sigal Chattah. Last year, Chattah, representing four plaintiffs, sued Governor Joe Lombardo (R) and Secretary of State Cisco Aguilar (D) challenging the legality of Senate Bill 406 known as the Election Worker Protection Bill. In October 2023, U.S. District Court Judge Cristina D. Silva dismissed Chattah’s lawsuit based on standing, but provided the plaintiff’s opportunity to amend the complaint. The plaintiffs maintain that an “election official”, cited in Chapter 293 of the law, is broad, undefined and relies on “absurd” subjective complaints of threats and intimidation which would result in a Class E felony of the accused. Furthermore, they allege that the law may conflict with the current Nevada law that provides the general public, poll watchers, and volunteers to observe polling places and ballot locations, such as tabulation areas and warehouses. The ACLJ agrees and contends that key terms in the bill are undefined and “impose vague and overbroad criminal penalties that threaten to undermine the ability of Nevadans to freely participate in the electoral process as poll workers, poll watchers, and engaged citizens.” In her temporary ruling, Silva cited that the plaintiffs do not have standing as they failed to allege a threat of “imminent, credible harm” and have failed to demonstrate “that there exists a credible threat of prosecution.” “A plaintiff’s subjective and irrational fear of prosecution is not enough to confer standing,” Silva wrote. The ACLJ disagrees and argues that the plaintiffs have standing, arguing that “when First Amendment rights are threatened, these individuals have standing to protect their constitutional rights.”

New York: The state Supreme Court in Orange County struck down a state law intended to prevent local officials from enacting rules that might suppress people’s voting rights because of their race. The John R. Lewis Voting Rights Act, named after the late civil rights activist who represented Georgia in the U.S. House of Representatives, was passed by the New York state Legislature in 2022 and aims to bring back a version of what was known as “preclearance” that was gutted from the federal Voting Rights Act of 1965 by a U.S. Supreme Court decision in 2013. Under that provision, states and counites with a record of suppressing the rights of Black voters once had to seek U.S. Justice Department approval before changing voting rules. The state law, in a similar fashion, mandates that local governments or school districts with a record of discrimination in New York must gain approval from state officials in order to pass certain voting policies. The court, in their decision, said the law violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which prohibits a state from depriving “any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” Since federal statute is supreme to any state law, the court ruled to strike down the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Act in its entirety. “When New York enacted the strongest voting rights law in the country, we knew there would be challenges. I disagree with the court’s legal reasoning and expect this decision will be overturned on appeal,” state Sen. Zellnor Myrie, chair of the state Senate Committee on Elections who authored the legislation, said in a statement.

Ohio: Glenford Edwards of East Cleveland has been indicted on seven counts of Illegal voting, according to Cuyahoga County court records. Edwards is also charged with false voter registration. The court records say he voted illegally on or about November 3, 2020, November 8, 2022, August 8, 2023, November 7, 2023, and March 19, 2024. The alleged false voter registration happened on or about April 22, 2024, according to court records.

South Carolina: Horry County Judge William H. Seals Jr. ruled this week that the town of Atlantic Beach will hold a special election to elect a new mayor and resolve a yearlong dispute over whether John David or Josephine Isom will be the town’s next leader. Seals issued the ruling on Tuesday affirming the Municipal Election Commission’s decision in April to invalidate the results of the November 2023 election. “In sum, the Court having determined that sufficient factual evidence exists justifying the MEC’s Decision to invalidate the mayoral election and finding no error of law that would justify disturbance of the MEC’s ruling, the Decision of the Atlantic Beach Municipal Election Commission is AFFIRMED,” Seals wrote in his ruling. Recently appointed interim Town Manager William Booker told News13 that no date has been set for a new election. He said town leaders are talking with the South Carolina Election Commission to work out the details.

Texas: Officials are planning to challenge a judge’s ruling voiding the Nov. 5 special election, arguing the court had no jurisdiction to interfere in the process while nullifying citizens’ votes. On Nov. 4 in Cameron County’s 197th state District Court, visiting Judge Michael Garcia handed down the ruling voiding the election following two weeks of early voting, citing a violation of the Texas Open Meetings Act. “The city disagrees with the judge’s decision to void the election and plans on taking any and all action necessary to fully protect the rights of its citizens to vote and the legitimate outcome of the votes cast by the citizens of San Benito,” city officials said in a news release. On Wednesday, City Commissioner Tom Goodman claimed Garcia’s action meddled with the Democratic process. “The citizens’ right to vote should not be determined by a judge,” he said in an interview. “That would interfere with the Democratic process. The people have voted. Why not accept their answer?”

U.S. Virgin Islands: Superior Court Judge Yvette Ross Edwards has dismissed the lawsuit filed by Supervisor of Elections Caroline Fawkes against the Board of Elections and its members, who had voted to include candidate Ida Smith on the ballot for delegate to Congress. The court’s decision, issued on Nov. 8 and leading to the dismissal on Nov. 12, underscores the limitations of authority for government officials acting independently within their roles. Fawkes initiated the lawsuit after disqualifying Smith’s candidacy in June, citing failure to meet residency requirements due to dual voter registration in New York and the Virgin Islands. However, the Board of Elections overruled this disqualification on Sept. 4, following a legal opinion from Attorney General Gordon Rhea, who asserted that eligibility criteria for delegate to Congress fall under federal jurisdiction rather than local law. The court found that Fawkes, as a government employee, lacked the authority to sue independently without explicit statutory authorization or the enforcement backing of the attorney general. Ross Edwards stated, “a lawsuit by the Supervisor of Elections against the Board, both in their official capacities, is a suit by the Government against the Government.” Additionally, the court determined that Fawkes could not proceed as a taxpayer plaintiff, as she failed to demonstrate an injury to a substantial right. The ruling also emphasized that she had no statutory authority to retain private counsel for this matter.

West Virginia: A voter in Mingo County filed a lawsuit after the wrong Democratic candidate for state Senate was mistakenly printed on ballots for early in-person voting. Jeff Disibbio became the Democratic state senate nominee for West Virginia’s 6th District in August after the primary winner, Randy Fowler, did not file required campaign finance reports and was disqualified. According to the lawsuit, during West Virginia’s early voting period Oct. 23-28, Fowler was still listed as the candidate on the ballot in Mingo County — leading to 678 voters casting incorrect ballots. The error was discovered Oct. 28 by the ballot printing vendor and the county issued corrected ballots for the rest of the early voting period and Election Day. The lawsuit alleges that Mingo County Clerk Larry Croaff never told voters who might have been impacted by the error, but told local press that voters could vote again with a provisional ballot. West Virginia Secretary of State Mac Warner (R) later clarified that this solution wouldn’t work, since in-person voting is anonymous in the state and therefore there’s no way to identify affected ballots and replace them with new, corrected ballots. Because of the error, the plaintiff alleges that Croaff’s mistake is part of a pattern of disenfranchising Democratic voters in Mingo County. The lawsuit asks the court to order Mingo County to hold a special election for constituents to cast their vote for the sixth state Senate district.










NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote! Michael H. Drucker