Electionline Weekly March-5-2026

Ballot Measures, Legislation & Rulemaking

Kenai Peninsula Borough, Alaska: The Kenai Peninsula Borough Assembly passed an ordinance at their last meeting on February 17, amending borough code on elections. The move comes after a majority of voters in October approved a ballot proposition — Proposition No. 5 — that changed the borough’s regular election date to align with the State of Alaska elections in November. Ordinance 2026-02 amends KPB Title 4 to update code on election worker compensation and the candidate filing period, add a new candidate withdrawal period and extend the terms of office for current elected officials to align with a November election date. According to the ordinance, prior to Prop 5’s ratification, the majority of election workers served during both the state primary elections in August and general elections in November, and the regular borough elections in October. Now, with both borough and state regular elections occurring in November, the borough feels it necessary to offer “competitive compensation in order to retain experienced election workers and attract new workers.”

Arizona: On a party-line vote, the Senate Committee on Judiciary and Elections approved a measure that would spell out that elections of candidates for all cities, towns and school districts have to occur on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November, and only in even-numbered years. SCR 1027, which now awaits a vote of the full Senate, is not the first effort by GOP lawmakers to override local laws on when voters go to the polls, elect their officials and decide on ballot issues. Lawmakers have tried this several times before, only to be slapped down by the Arizona Supreme Court. In the most recent ruling in 2021, Justice Ann Scott Timmer, writing for the majority, said the Arizona Constitution clearly gives cities that have adopted their own charters “autonomy over matters of purely municipal concern.” And she said when cities run local elections, that fits the definition.

California Ballot Measure: A proposed initiative to require Californians to show identification every time they vote, and election officials to verify registered voters are U.S. citizens, appears to have enough support to qualify for the November ballot according to the Los Angeles Times. Proponents say they have collected more than 1.3 million voter signatures on petitions supporting the ballot measure, far more than required under California law, and plan to submit them to county elections officials March 2 for verification. The petitions being submitted for the California Voter ID Initiative will be reviewed by county election officials, who must verify that the people who signed are registered voters in the state and that the proponents collected at least the 874,641 valid signatures required to qualify for the November ballot. The ballot measure will make significant changes to how Californians vote, and enact new mandates on county elections officials. Among the top changes being proposed:

Every time a voter casts a ballot in person in any election in California, they must present government-issued identification. Californians voting by mail will be required to list on the ballot envelope the last four digits of a “unique identifying number from a government issued identification” — essentially a pin number like people use at an ATM — that matches the one the voter designated when they registered to vote.

The California secretary of state and county election officials will be required to verify that registered voters are U.S. citizens by “using government data,” which according to supporters could include information in the federal Social Security Administration database, jury summons information and other government records.

The secretary of state and county election officials must maintain accurate voter registration lists. If requested, the state would be required to a provide eligible voters with free voter identification cards for use during elections.

Colorado: Lawmakers are fast-tracking a pair of election bills they say will protect the state’s mail ballot system and tighten rules for elected officials. The measures, one that expands ballot access timelines and another that bars lawmakers from holding multiple elected offices, cleared their first chambers this week. The House, on a party-line vote, signed off on House Bill 1113. While much of the bill is an annual clean-up of elections law, HB 1113 also aims to address concerns that ballots mailed to county clerks by voters through the U.S. Postal Service could be delayed by recent rule changes. Under HB 1113, drop-off locations for ballot boxes will be ready for ballots 22 days before the election, up from 15 days in the current law. Ballots would be mailed to voters 29 days before the primary and general elections, up from 22 days. Both are intended to give voters more time to submit their ballots. The bill also removes mail as an acceptable method for submitting certain information. That includes notifying election judges that they’ve been appointed and accepting that appointment, or using mail for the Secretary of State to send county clerks a written certificate of the ballot order and content for each county. During testimony on HB 1113 last month, co-sponsor Rep. Emily Sirota, D-Denver, said the bill is largely a technical cleanup but will also address issues such as long lines sometimes found at voting service centers. According to Sirota, much of the bill came from the county clerks. HB 1113 won preliminary approval on Monday and a final 41-22 vote on Tuesday.

Florida: The Senate has passed the House version of a bill that would relax rules for students who volunteer at polling places. HB 461, sponsored by Republican Rep. Kiyan Michael, says the ban on privately funded election-related expenses would not bar high school students who are registered or preregistered to vote from voluntarily helping poll workers in exchange for community service hours that apply to Bright Futures scholarships. Students can preregister to vote once they turn 16. The bill would take effect July 1, meaning that eligible students could begin participating in the process during the August Primaries this year if it becomes law. The League of Women Voters and the Southern Poverty Law Center support the legislation. Republican Sen. Clay Yarborough laid down the companion (SB 564) to take up the version previously passed by the House. Yarborough previously told the Senate Ethics and Elections Committee that this bill, if passed, “will be one of the greatest firsthand civics lessons, which they can experience as they go along, of one of our greatest rights and what it takes to conduct elections.” Michael told the House Government Operations Subcommittee the bill allowed students to volunteer on weekends, addressing a potential shortage of volunteers, driving engagement and teaching a “civic lesson.”

Georgia: A new Republican-led bill could change the way you vote next November. It would do away with county-wide early voting and require hand-marked paper ballots. Senate Bill 568 was introduced March 2. Senator Greg Dolezal (R-Cumming) is sponsoring the legislation. The bill proposes sweeping changes to state elections, including early voting. Right now, a person can cast their ballot at any polling location in their county during the early voting period. Under the proposed legislation that would change, voters would be restricted to one voting location. If the bill becomes law, voters would also be required to fill out hand-marked paper ballots which would then be tabulated by machines, and the Republican-led state elections board would be put in charge of voting challenges and recounts. “So, in a county that has more than one advanced early location, which I think is 18 counties, we would assign voters to an early voting location. And so, the thinking there is that most people are going to vote at the early voting location closest to their home anyway,” Dolezal explained. “We are looking to put teeth into the voter challenge law,” said Dolezal, “So, that people that are registered to vote right now at UPS stores, empty buildings, parking lots, under overpasses, finally get off these voting rolls.” The measure must pass the Senate by March 6 to stay alive for the rest of the legislative session.

Indiana: On Feb. 24, Indiana Gov. Mike Braun (R) signed legislation prohibiting the use of ranked-choice voting in the state, making Indiana the 19th state to ban RCV nationwide. Indiana’s new law states that an election “may not be determined by ranked choice voting” and a “candidate may not be nominated for or elected to an office by means of ranked choice voting.” Sen. Blake Doriot (R), who sponsored the bill, said during a committee hearing in January that he found RCV “somewhat distressing because in the United States we have always been one vote, one person.” Speaking during the committee hearing, state Sen. J.D. Ford (D) said, “We already don’t have it [RCV] in our state. We should be focusing on bills that get us out from the bottom in terms of voter participation in our state.” The legislation passed the Indiana Senate on Jan. 20 on a 38-9 vote, with 37 Republicans and one Democrat voting in favor and nine Democrats voting against. It was then approved on a 58-30 vote in the state House on Feb. 17, with 58 Republicans voting in favor and 28 Democrats and two Republicans voting against. The prohibition on RCV in Indiana takes effect on July 1. No municipalities in the state currently use RCV.

Kentucky: Lawmakers are taking a closer look at laws that impact elections. House Bill 534 would update how voter rolls are maintained and set new rules for ballot handling and voting equipment. Bill co-sponsor Rep. T.J. Roberts, R-Burlington, said HB 534 would strengthen election integrity by changing several aspects of Kentucky’s election requirements. The bill would require the Administrative Office of the Courts to give the State Board of Elections a list of anyone who has been convicted of a felony, including those with pending appeals. It would also allow the State Board of Elections to partner with federal agencies to identify and remove people who are not U.S. citizens from voter rolls. HB 534 has had its second reading in the Kentucky House of Representatives and is now being considered by the full House along with filed amendments.

Michigan: A leader in the House Republican caucus is pushing new legislation that would require voters to prove they are United States citizens when they register to vote, and that bill had its first hearing on Tuesday before the chamber’s Election Integrity Committee. The legislation, House Bill 4765, sponsored by state Rep. Jason Woolford (R-Howell), hits upon a major Republican agenda item in 2026 and beyond — ensuring that only U.S. citizens vote in state and federal elections — which is already a legal requirement. Regardless, the bill will likely move through the House quickly with the committee’s chair, state Rep. Rachelle Smit (R-Martin), appearing poised to move the bill soon at a future meeting. Woolford’s bill does face an uphill battle with the Legislature’s Democrats, however, and even if it is fast-tracked in the lower chamber, the Democratic-led state Senate would surely kill the bill. Woolford’s bill mimics the current citizen-only ballot measure that is gathering signatures necessary to appear before voters this November. His legislation would require a would-be registered voter to provide a photocopy or an in-person copy of the following documents to prove citizenship: A driver license or personal identification card issued by the Michigan Department of State or the equivalent from another state, as long as the Department of State or other state’s department indicates on the license or card that the individual has provided satisfactory evidence of citizenship; A birth certificate that verifies citizenship, which could be accompanied by a marriage license or other documentation that shows a name change; A passport identifying the applicant and their passport number; Naturalization documents or the number of their certificate of naturalization; The applicant’s certificate of citizenship; The applicant’s American Indian card issued by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security with the classification “KIC”; A Bureau of Indian Affairs card number, Indian census number, tribal treaty card number, or tribal enrollment number; or The applicant’s certification of report of birth or consular report of birth abroad.

Michigan Ballot Measure: The group behind a ballot measure to ensure that only U.S. citizens vote in future elections says they turned in 750,000 petition signatures. The group only needs 446,198 valid petition signatures, or 10% of the total votes cast for governor in the previous election cycle — for the measure to appear before voters in 2026. Americans for Citizens Voting, spearheaded by Republican operatives Paul Jacob and Kurt O’Keefe held a news conference to announce their progress in moving the initiative forward. The group said it would deliver its signatures to the Michigan Department of State later on Wednesday afternoon, and well ahead of the state’s July 6 deadline. Jacob said the early delivery and the fact that the group collected nearly 300,000 more signatures than it needs to potentially hit the much lower valid signature threshold, was a show of confidence for the initiative. It also served as a sign that Michigan voters were ready to make things like citizen-only voting and a voter identification requirement an inalienable part of the state constitution. The amendment would add the following measures and verifications to the state Constitution: clear statement that only U.S. citizens are allowed to vote in local, state and federal elections. The group claims this will close the loopholes allowing non-citizens to slip through; New voter roll verifications, compelling the secretary of state to review rolls and remove non-citizens if they are found; and A new photo ID requirement, which must be presented before casting a vote. The language states that if people are unable to prove their citizenship or obtain a valid photo ID, a process would be put in place that they can have access to a state ID free of charge.

Missouri: A bill that would require first-time Missouri voters to provide documentary proof of U.S. citizenship was heard March 2 in the Local Government, Elections and Pensions Committee. Senate Bill 986, sponsored by Sen. Ben Brown, R-Washington, specifies the type of identification that would be accepted. These include a valid U.S. passport, a Real ID or a military ID with a record of service. A government or Missouri-issued ID would be acceptable if accompanied by a certified birth certificate, hospital birth record, final adoption decree or a consular report of birth abroad. Voters would also be required to personally provide all information on their voter registration form. The bill specifies that voters who are already registered, or are transferring their registration within the state, would be exempt from these documentation requirements. Election officials would be required to reject any application that isn’t accompanied by the required documents. Applicants would be notified of this decision within 10 business days. Any documentation received before 7 p.m. on Election Day would be registered by the date the application was first submitted. To ensure proper voter registration records are kept, each circuit court clerk in Missouri would be required to submit monthly lists to the secretary of state of individuals who identified themselves as noncitizens when called to jury duty.

Oklahoma: Lawmakers are debating early voting changes and budget priorities, with supporters saying standardized voting could simplify elections. A proposed elections bill that would standardize early voting periods for local races by adding full-day Saturday voting, mirroring procedures used in statewide elections Supporters say the change would simplify voter access and communication, while critics question its likelihood of passage. “I just like it for communication,” Sen. Julia Kirt, D-Oklahoma City, said. “If we say we’re consolidating elections in order to make it more straightforward for people, then let’s also consolidate and normalize those early voting time periods.” Legislators are expected to continue negotiations in the coming weeks as committee hearings and budget talks shape the final legislative package. Supporters of early voting reform and mental health investment say those issues remain critical to state governance.

South Dakota: Minnehaha County’s chronic inability to get prompt election results to the public could be addressed with changes to state law on absentee ballots, Minnehaha County Auditor Leah Anderson told lawmakers this week. Anderson was among several county election officials who spoke on behalf of Senate Bill 171. The bill would allow a county’s absentee ballot board to begin processing absentee ballots on the day before an election. Current law doesn’t allow ballots to be processed until the day of the election. Anderson said that processing an absentee ballot versus a traditional ballot cast on Election Day is three times more work for her staff. They must be recorded when they are received in the mail, and then they have to be removed from an envelope and undergo additional processing.

Tennessee: A new bill introduced in the General Assembly that would scrap voting centers and force a return to precinct balloting. Known as House Bill 2304 and Senate Bill 0477, it was introduced on Feb. 2 by sponsors Rep. Jody Barrett, R-Dickson, and Sen. Janice Bowling, R-Tullahoma. The Senate version of the bill was approved on first consideration that same day. It was subsequently passed on second consideration Feb. 5 and was referred to that body’s State and Local Government Committee. That same day, the House bill was turned over to the Elections and Campaign Finance Subcommittee, also on Feb. 5. If passed by both houses, the bills would eliminate voting centers in the state’s 95 counties by deleting Title 2, Chapter 3, Part 3 of the Tennessee Code Annotated, which allows pilot programs for voting centers. A second part of the bill adds rules for early voting satellite locations, including laws about the number of precincts that must be adjacent in such a location, as well as a return to the use of paper ballots and optical scanners.

Utah: A new bill focused on voter identification at the polls moved forward with an 8-3 committee vote on February 25, and a second draft was introduced to the House on February 26. The bill, HB0479, would extend beyond Election Day, requiring a form of valid ID to drop off a mail-in ballot, which means poll workers would need to be present. Rep. Nicholeen Peck, R-Tooele, voted yes for the bill to be introduced to the House. “The people really want security in their elections,” Peck said. “I was thinking to myself, ‘Yeah, we already ID people when they come into vote – it’s a normal practice.” But HB0479 would demand two poll workers guarding each drop box and limited hours to return ballots. Lawmakers had questions surrounding what it would cost to pay poll workers to guard drop boxes, and if limited hours would hurt voter turnout. Lawmakers who voted no said they are worried the legislation would take Utah’s successful voter turnout and flatten it. Ultimately, the House version of the bill moved on to the Senate with a 42-30 vote. The bill stalled on Tuesday after the Senate Government and Operations Committee abruptly ended the debate before it even got started and voted not to take any action.

Several other election reforms are on trajectory to become Utah law. HB209, sponsored by Rep. Cory Maloy, R-Lehi, would require residents to show proof of citizenship to vote in state elections, instead of simply attesting to citizenship. The bill passed the House and awaits a final Senate vote. SB153, sponsored by Sen. John Johnson, R-North Ogden, would make most private voter records public unless a reason is given. This would bring Utah in line with most other states. The bill passed the Senate and awaits a final House vote. HB32, sponsored by Rep. Paul Cutler, R-Centerville, and HB242, sponsored by Rep. Karen Peterson, R-Clinton, clarify the training and gathering requirements for signature petition circulators. Both await final Senate approval.

Lawmakers, predominantly Republicans, want to take election oversight away from the lieutenant governor. They’re advancing a proposal to amend the Utah Constitution to give that role to a newly created and independently elected secretary of state. “We have a bit of an inherent distrust of elections, no matter if the actors are good — and they are,” Rep. Lisa Shepherd, R-Provo, told the House Government Operations Committee on February 24. My bill,” she continued, “has nothing to do with the people that are currently in there, or people in the past. Mine is strictly about structure. It’s not about personalities, parties, politics or people.” She added that she didn’t want Utah’s elected lieutenant governor to be tainted by the “muck of elections and the controversy that surrounds it.”The new secretary of state would also be elected under Shepherd’s legislation, although it provides that the lieutenant governor would make decisions for races in which the secretary of state is a candidate. The committee gave near-unanimous approval to proposed amendment HJR25 and the accompanying HB529, with one Democrat voting against it. While the bill passed out of the House of Representatives with bipartisan support, the Senate Government Operations and Political Subdivisions Committee voted 6-1 on March 2 to table it, effectively halting its progress in the final week of the session. “I don’t think this policy is conservative in any way,” said Senate Minority Assistant Whip Mike McKell, R-Spanish Fork, noting that it doesn’t change the election process at all. “It doesn’t fix the conflict of interest, and it certainly doesn’t enhance transparency.”

Wyoming: Sen. Tara Nethercott, R-Cheyenne, told her colleagues that the state’s county clerks were afraid — not of election fraud, but of overblown calls for election reform. “I think what they have experienced over the last six years is fear,” Nethercott said during debate on House Bill 85, which would have required enhanced record-keeping, public observation and formal objection procedures during post-election ballot audits. Opponents of the bill characterized it as overkill that could lead to clerk intimidation. She challenged her colleagues to “show the level of courage and discretion to rise above that populism, to rise above that public perception, and just do what’s right.” The Senate obliged. HB 85 failed on a decisive vote, marking the second bill inspired by the troubled 2024 general election in Weston County to die in the chamber this week. House Bill 86, which would have allowed the Secretary of State to file formal complaints seeking the removal of county clerks, died 2-3 in the Senate Corporations Committee.

U.S. Department of Justice: Late last week, the U.S. Department of Justice sued five more states – Kentucky, New Jersey, Oklahoma, Utah, and West Virginia – in an effort to obtain the state’s complete and unredacted voter registration information. According to The New York Times, the suits filed on February 26 did not directly mention the Administration’s broader allegations of what it calls voter fraud, which the government has used elsewhere to justify efforts to seize ballots and other voting records. So far, roughly 11 Republican-governed states have complied with the requests for voter data, according to the Brennan Center for Justice, while the states with Republican leadership targeted by the Justice Department lawsuits have not. The Justice Department has now sued 29 states and the District of Columbia as part of its effort to seize voter data. Federal judges have dismissed those lawsuits in three early cases — California, Michigan and Oregon — in rulings that rebuked the Trump administration. Two of the judges issued explicit warnings that, in their view, the Trump administration could not be trusted and that its efforts to centralize the electoral process posed a serious risk.

Alabama: Three women in Monroe County have been indicted for voter fraud in the Aug 26, 2025, Frisco City municipal election. Sixty-seven -year-old Sharon Crayton Denson, 46-year-old Samantha Trashawn Kyles, and 59-year-old Sarah Crayton Bennett are accused of falsifying and submitting official voting documents to election officials. Between the three of them, they allegedly tampered with ballots for 20 people. Court documents reveal Denson is charged with six counts of unlawful use of absentee ballots and six counts of submitting false ballot applications. She’s accused of filling out absentee ballots for seven people. Her bail is set at $36,000. Kyles is charged with four counts of unlawful use of absentee ballots and three counts of submitting false ballot applications. She is accused of altering ballots for four people. She is being held on $21,000 bail. As for Bennett, court records show she is facing nine counts of unlawful use of absentee ballots and nine counts of submitting false ballot applications after filling out ballots for nine people. Her bond is set at $54,000. All three are currently held at the Monroe County Jail. The Alabama Attorney General’s Office is handling the case.

Arizona: A coalition of Republican voters argued before the Ninth Circuit this week that Arizona’s bloated voter rolls may dilute their own votes, but the three-judge panel is skeptical of the speculative claim according to Courthouse News Service. Led by former Arizona Republican Party Chair Gina Swoboda, the plaintiffs claim that Secretary of State Adrian Fontes failed to remove up to 1.2 million voters from Arizona’s registration rolls, violating the National Voter Registration Act and allowing ineligible voters to cast fraudulent ballots. Mark Pinkert, representing the plaintiffs, said there’s “a lot of evidence” of potential voter fraud stemming from inaccurate voter rolls but declined to provide specifics when asked. “What evidence of impending harm is there?” U.S. Circuit Judge Richard Clifton asked Monday morning in a Phoenix courtroom. “There seems to be a complete void when it comes to whether ineligible people have voted.” Pinkert, of Holtzman Vogel, said the more ineligible people on the rolls, the more likely voter fraud becomes. Clifton, a George W. Bush appointee, wasn’t sold. “The fear that somebody who might not be eligible votes, that doesn’t dilute anything,” he said. “Unless the other person votes, there’s no dilution.” In addition to vote dilution, the plaintiffs claim they have lost confidence in election integrity, which may discourage future voting, and have spent resources on canvassing and voter education to counter the supposed fraud. U.S. District Judge Dominic Lanza dismissed the complaint in 2024, finding the plaintiffs lacked standing and cognizable injury.

California: Judge Benjamin Hanna ruled that Shasta County must pause preparations to place a citizen-led initiative on voters’ ballots this June. His ruling came in response to a petition filed by an anonymous plaintiff earlier this month. The measure is known as the Voter ID, Hand-Counted Ballots, and Absentee Voting Limits Initiative. If passed it would amend Shasta County’s charter to implement new local voting rules that contradict state election law, including voter ID requirements. Supervisors have already approved it to be placed on voter ballots for the June 2 primary after nearly 7,000 signatures in support of the ballot were verified by the election office. But that’s now on hold until at least April 10. Shasta County supervisors met in closed session late last week to discuss the legal challenge, eventually voting 4-1 to take no position on the petition. According to arguments presented by the petitioner, placing the measure on ballots would cause irreparable harm in the form of significant costs to taxpayers for a ballot initiative doomed to be eventually overturned by legal action even if initially passed by voters. After hearing from Doe on the matter, Hanna said that in the absence of any opposing argument from the county he lacked information to contradict her claim and was therefore granting the petitioner’s request for a temporary restraining order to pause the measure’s forward momentum. Hanna also ruled that the plaintiff behind the legal action must amend her petition within five days to include her real name in legal documents saying that the public’s access to that information was in the interests of democracy. The petition was filed over an initiative that has already been placed on ballots by the proper authorities, he added, so the public has significant interest in this case. But he also expressed concern for the welfare of Doe, acknowledging that her petition, and especially the fact that she filed it on her own behalf, places her under significant public scrutiny. As a result, he ruled that her contact details — including her address, phone number and employer — will remain hidden from the public and must not be shared by other parties in the case.

Georgia: U.S. District Judge J.P. Boulee has ordered Fulton County and the U.S. government to go into mediation over the FBI’s seizure of hundreds of boxes of ballots and other records from the county’s election hub. In an order signed on February 25, Boulee said he would like Fulton County and the federal government to mediate the dispute, giving them a deadline of March 4 to agree on a mediator. “As the parties’ most recent filings show, they have had some dialogue regarding a resolution in this matter,” Boulee wrote in a footnote. “The filings also demonstrate that those discussions have stalled. In the Court’s view, the parties’ relative positions point largely to ‘an all or nothing approach.'” If the two parties can’t agree on a mediator by the deadline, the court will appoint one. The two sides will then have until March 18 to conduct the mediation and report the results to the court. Boulee’s ruling comes a week after Fulton County officials filed an amended motion demanding the FBI return the records, which the county claimed were “improperly seized.”

A Georgia voting rights group and two labor unions are suing Republican Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger for refusing to hand over records related to a 2025 mass voter registration cancellation. The lawsuit alleges Raffensperger violated the National Voter Registration Act by refusing to let Black Voters Matter and local affiliates of the Communications Workers of America labor union inspect all records they requested related to the voter list maintenance effort. The groups filed the suit in federal court in Atlanta on February 27. “The limited information the Secretary’s office released to the public raised as many questions as it provided answers,” the groups argued. “Most notably, the Secretary did not explain in any detail his office’s methodology for identifying voters to place on the Purge List.” In July, Raffensperger announced the cancellation of about 478,000 voter registrations that were in an inactive status — among the largest mass voter cancellations in U.S. history. The state does similar cancellations every two years, targeting registrations of people who moved or didn’t participate in recent elections. Last summer’s cancellation amounted to about 6% of Georgia’s registered voters.

Illinois: Eighteen former U.S. Department of Justice attorneys filed a brief in federal court this week opposing the Trump administration’s lawsuit that seeks access to sensitive personal information about every registered voter in Illinois. In a friend-of-the-court brief filed in U.S. District Court in Springfield, the attorneys — including many who served in both Democratic and Republican administrations — argue the Department of Justice has no legal authority to demand the information. They also accuse the agency of concealing its real purpose for seeking the data, which they argue is “to enable the federal government to conduct its own list maintenance to discover whether noncitizens or undocumented immigrants are registered to vote.” “The holy trinity of identity theft, as I’ve called it,” David Becker, one of the former DOJ attorneys who signed the brief, said during a media briefing. Becker said he and the other attorneys have filed similar briefs in most of the ongoing lawsuits seeking access to sensitive voter information in other states. He said while it is not common for former DOJ attorneys to intervene in cases against their former employer, it is also not unprecedented. “I don’t go around looking for places to disagree with the Department of Justice. I’m much happier when I think the Department of Justice is looking out for all of us and enforcing the law as it should be,” he said. “But in these cases, we needed to point out how the department’s efforts to seize sensitive voter data from every American voter from the states that hold that sensitive data, that have state laws that protect that data, how that was unprecedented.”

Michigan: The U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear a case against Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, challenging the state’s process for canceling the voter registration for dead individuals. The suit was filed by the Public Interest Legal Foundation, a conservative law firm which has filed suits in several states aimed at pushing election officials to aggressively purge their voter rolls. The group has previously made false claims about voter fraud in the U.S. In its suit against the Michigan Department of State, the group argued that the state does not properly maintain its voter rolls under the National Voter Registration Act, allowing thousands of deceased voters to remain on file. However, a U.S. District Court judge dismissed the suit, noting “the record demonstrates that deceased voters are removed from Michigan’s voter rolls on a regular and ongoing basis.” The decision was upheld by the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, prior to the group’s appeal to the Supreme Court. “Michigan is one of the most active states in the nation when it comes to keeping our voter file up to date and cancelling the registrations of people who have died,” Benson said in a statement. “The claims in this lawsuit were not supported by evidence; they were partisan attacks aimed at undermining people’s faith in our secure elections. I’m glad to see the Supreme Court acknowledge that the facts and the law still matter and stand with the lower courts that have praised Michigan’s comprehensive work to maintain accurate voter rolls.”

New Jersey: The Republican National Committee filed a lawsuit alleging that the Bergen County Board of Elections illegally rejected an open public records request seeking a list of poll workers assigned to early voting sites and Election Day polling locations during the 2025 general election. Republicans want to know if poll worker positions are given predominantly to members of one political party in violation of a state law that says the number of Democrats and Republicans are supposed to be equal. According to the complaint, sixteen other counties complied with an identical request. Bergen refused, citing exemptions of “emergency or security information and “security measures and surveillance techniques.” The Republicans argue that the election board failed to explain how those exemptions apply. The RNC requested a list of all poll workers, including each worker’s party affiliation and any vacancies at each polling location. In addition to Bergen County, four other counties did not fulfill the OPRA request: Gloucester, Hudson, Mercer, and Union. Only Bergen is the target of a lawsuit so far.

New York: The town of Newburgh will switch to a ranked choice voting system to elect town board members under an agreement reached in a lawsuit that alleged its at-large election system weakens the voting power of Black and Hispanic residents under the Voting Rights Act of New York State. The lawsuit was filed by residents – Oral Clarke, Romance Reed, Grace Perez, Peter Ramon, Ernest Tirado and Dorothy Flournoy – against the town and its five-member town board in March 2024. A state judge approved the settlement last week. While the town did not concede it violated the state Voting Rights Act enacted in 2022, it agreed to adopt ranked choice voting and cease using the at-large system beginning next year to elect the five members of the town board, which includes the town supervisor. The town must pay the plaintiffs’ attorney fees and costs totaling $1.6 million, according to the agreement.

Pennsylvania: The York County Board of Elections sued a local school board over an issue regarding voting access. The board announced this week that it filed a lawsuit against Dover Area School Board to require the district to allow use of its buildings for voting on Election Day. The board of elections claims that it has made multiple requests for the school board to allow access to district buildings as polling places. The school board has continuously denied these requests, according to the board of elections, with the most recent instance being a 5-4 vote against the request during a school board meeting on Feb. 17. The school board’s rejection of the request would prohibit the use of district buildings as polling places, the board of elections said. The county’s request to use the district buildings would start with the May 19 Primary Election and continue for future elections. According to the board of elections, state law requires school districts to provide access to buildings for use as polling places if requested. It goes on to say that Dover Area High School and Middle School are optimal polling places because of their size, accessibility, location and capacity. “We are disappointed that the Dover Area School Board has chosen not to partner with the county to ensure all voters in the district have safe, secure and easy access to their polling station on Election Day,” said York County Board of Elections President Julie Wheeler. “Other school districts across the county, and across the Commonwealth, are able to accommodate the safe and efficient use of their schools for polling locations. There is no reason Dover Area School District can’t make the same reasonable accommodations for voters in that community.”

Matthew Laiss, 31 of Bethlehem was convicted at trial this week for voting twice in the 2020 presidential election. Federal prosecutors say Laiss mailed a ballot for his former address in Ottsville, Bucks County, on Oct. 31, 2020. Then he voted in person on Nov. 3, 2020, at his new home in Frostproof, Florida, court records say.

Virginia: Virginia’s highest court issued a stay this week that allows early voting for the redistricting referendum to begin on Friday in Tazewell County, with less than 48 hours until the polls are slated to open for early voting. The Virginia Supreme Court’s decision has allowed the state Department of Elections and Tazewell County to move forward with preparations for the April 21 referendum. The Department of Elections will update election officials Thursday with new information and action items, said department spokesperson Andrea Gaines. Tazewell County had been the only locality that was set to sit out of the referendum after Circuit Judge Jack Hurley Jr. had ruled earlier in the day to maintain a previous order that barred the county from administering the election.

Attorney General Jay Jones has issued an opinion regarding the start of early voting for the redistricting referendum as court battles over its legality continue. The opinion, requested by Sen. Scott Surovell (D-Fairfax) and Del. Marcia Price (D-Newport News), states that electoral boards and general registrars are required under Virginia law to provide for in-person absentee voting starting 45 days before Election Day. It also makes clear that boards and registrars cannot delay or fail to initiate early voting without a valid order “expressly enjoining such administration” issued by a court. Jones further states that “any local resolution, regardless of a locality’s stated justification, that attempts to prevent election officials from implementing in-person absentee voting is inconsistent with state law and therefore legally invalid.”

Wisconsin: The City of Madison appealed a ruling that allows it to be sued for monetary damages for disenfranchising nearly 200 voters in the 2024 election, arguing the decision would unrealistically require “error-free elections” and expose municipalities across the state to liability for mistakes. The appeal comes after Dane County Circuit Court Judge David Conway Feb. 9 ruling that Madison could face potential financial liability for disenfranchising 193 voters whose absentee ballots were unintentionally left uncounted. Notably, the city did not specifically contest the judge’s rejection in that ruling of its earlier argument that absentee voting is merely a “privilege” under state law — a claim that would have shielded it from damages. Instead, the appeal centers on who has the authority to enforce election laws and whether voters can sue for negligence. The city argues that such complaints must go first to the Wisconsin Elections Commission and asks higher courts to revisit a landmark 1866 case that allowed damages against election officials who deprive citizens of the right to vote. “It is not difficult to imagine how the circuit court’s ruling may be perceived as an opportunity by partisan actors to influence the election,” attorneys for the city, former Clerk Maribeth Witzel-Behl, and Deputy Clerk Jim Verbick wrote in the filing.

Wyoming: The Wyoming Attorney General’s Office has formally filed a verified petition in 6th Judicial District Court seeking the removal of Weston County Clerk Becky Hadlock from office, alleging misconduct or malfeasance tied to the 2024 general election and her failure to comply with a legislative subpoena. The Verified Petition for Removal of County Officer, filed Feb. 20 in Weston County District Court, asks the court to enter an order removing Hadlock as county clerk pursuant to Wyoming state statute. A summons issued in the case served to the chief election officer directs Hadlock to file an answer within 20 days after service or risk entry of default judgment. Hadlock was elected in November 2022 for Weston County and was responsible for conducting the Nov. 5, 2024, general election. The state alleges that prior to the election, Hadlock ordered ballots through a third-party printer and approved a draft ballot that was improperly formatted, affecting the races for House District 1 and county commissioner. Although the errors were later corrected, improperly formatted ballots had already been printed and mailed to the county, the petition states. The filing further alleges that Hadlock failed to establish or use reliable procedures to inventory ballots upon receipt and allowed improperly formatted ballots to be commingled with correctly formatted ballots, both of which were distributed and used at polling places. The petition also focuses on Hadlock’s post-election audit. If the case proceeds, a jury of Weston County residents would ultimately determine whether Hadlock should be removed from office, as previously reported. As of press time, no hearing date had been announced in the 6th Judicial District Court matter.










NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote! Michael H. Drucker