Electionline Weekly-April-2-2026

Ballot Measures, Legislation & Rulemaking

Federal Legislation: An amendment that would require voters to show photo identification to cast a ballot failed to advance in the Senate last week. The amendment to the elections bill needed 60 votes to advance. It was defeated in a 53 to 47 vote. The vote came during the second week of a marathon debate over the SAVE America Act. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer condemned the amendment before the vote, arguing it would “impose the single strictest voter ID law in America.” “This radical amendment would toss out every single voter ID requirement in all 50 states for federal elections and put in an overly restrictive, one-size-fits-all approach,” the New York Democrat said. GOP Sen. Jon Husted of Ohio offered the amendment, which lists valid forms of photo ID as a driver’s license, state-issued identification, passport, military ID or tribal ID. Ahead of the vote, Husted called the amendment “clean, simple, straightforward,” adding that there are “no additional restrictions, no tricks, no games, no prohibition on absentee voting.” Schumer said it would require people who vote by mail to include a photocopy of their ID with their ballot, which would eliminate the secrecy of how someone voted. Husted accused Schumer of misrepresenting how the mail-in ballot process would work. He said voters would include a photo of their ID or the last four digits of their Social Security number on the outside of the secrecy envelope containing the ballot. The information would be validated to ensure that it’s from a registered voter before separating it from the ballot, which would be counted separately, he said.

Navajo Nation: The Navajo Nation Council has unanimously passed legislation opposing the SAVE America Act. Navajo leaders say the SAVE Act would disproportionately impact tribal members as many elders weren’t born in hospitals and often lack the documentation. “For many Navajo people, this is not a Democrat or Republican issue,” says Navajo Speaker Crystalyne Curley, the tribal legislation’s sponsor. “We are thinking about our elders and grandparents, many of whom were not born in hospitals and do not have birth certificates. Under the SAVE Act, they would be required to travel long distances, multiple times, just to register to vote and cast their ballots.” Curley says some voters could be forced to travel more than 100 miles to comply with the proposed requirements with multiple trips for registration, primary elections and general elections. Those trips could prove financially difficult for many amid rising gas prices.

Alabama: A bill to require some precincts to undergo post-election audits passed Alabama’s House this week. House Bill 95 would require every county probate judge to randomly pick at least one precinct to have a post-election audit. Each county would be reimbursed by the state costs of the audits, which would happen around a month after a statewide general election. State Republicans have said the bill is about making sure election results reflect the will of the voters. “House Bill 95 begins the process of a formal post-election audit in Alabama for the very first time,” said Sen. Jay Hovey (R-Auburn). “This bill requires the probate judge of each county to conduct a post-election audit after every county and statewide general election to determine the accuracy of the originally reported results.” Secretary of State Wes Allen (R-Alabama) and current candidate for lieutenant governor, provided the following statement after the senate’s passage of House Bill 95: “Today, the Alabama Legislature passed HB 95, a bill that requires audits after state and county elections. I have always supported election transparency. I voted for post-election audits when I was a member of the Alabama House of Representatives. I am glad to see the Alabama Legislature take this step to ensure voter confidence in our elections and look forward to this legislation being signed into Alabama law.” House Bill 95 will now reach Gov. Kay Ivey’s desk, where she is expected to sign it into law.

A House committee has approved House Bill 486, a sweeping elections proposal that would create an Alabama Voting Rights Act and establish a commission to enforce it. The bill would expand access to voting by allowing early, in-person voting ahead of Election Day and removing current restrictions on who can vote absentee. It would also automatically restore voting rights for some people with felony convictions if they meet certain requirements, including completing their sentence and paying fines and fees, while excluding those convicted of certain violent crimes.

Delaware: Amended legislation was approved in the House of Representatives last week to enshrine early voting. Senate Substitute 1 for Senate Bill 2 would place in the Constitution the current practice of early voting, which for several years has been permitted for 10 calendar days before an election. Additionally, legislation aimed at changing voter status rules in Delaware has passed the state House, moving one step closer to becoming law. The measure, known as House Amendment 1 to Senate Substitute 1 for Senate Bill 3, would prevent permanent absentee voting in the state. Under the broader bill, Delaware voters would still be allowed to request an absentee ballot for each election without providing a reason. However, the amendment clarifies that voters cannot remain on a permanent absentee list. The legislation comes as absentee voting laws in Delaware have faced legal scrutiny in recent years. In October 2022, the Delaware Supreme Court ruled that a vote-by-mail statute violated the state constitution, finding it expanded absentee voting beyond what is permitted. The updated legislation now heads back to the Delaware Senate for further review and consideration.

Florida: Gov. Ron DeSantis has signed the latest “voting integrity ” legislation into law. The governor signed the bill (HB 991) into law this week following its approval by the Florida Legislature last month. The law requires people who are registering to vote to produce evidence of citizenship, such as a valid passport or birth certificate. It will take effect Jan. 1, 2027. Floridians approved a constitutional amendment in 2020 requiring that only U.S. citizens are qualified to vote in state elections. In addition to requiring proof of citizenship, the bill: Requires all voting to be done using paper ballots; Requires the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles to include legal status on any new, replacement, or renewal driver’s license or identification card; Requires candidates to disclose dual citizenship they may possess; Requires new and returning candidates for Congress to disclose their intentions regarding stock trading while in office; and Removes student IDs from being an acceptable form of identification to show at the polls. Minutes after he signed the bill, a coalition of voting rights advocates filed a federal lawsuit challenging the new law, arguing it would disenfranchise eligible voters and create unnecessary barriers to the franchise. They noted that thousands of Floridians lack ready access to those documents.

Georgia: The Senate is pushing to require hand-marked paper ballots by the midterms, racing to meet a self-imposed deadline while setting up a clash with House lawmakers who want to delay the switch. Senate Republicans doubled down on their plan late last week in the final days of the legislative session, sparking confusion as competing elections proposals advance during the frenetic closing days of the 40-day session. The standoff over the bill, which passed 32-21, has put lawmakers and elections officials in a bind as they grapple with how to meet a mandate they set two years ago to eliminate QR codes from ballots by July. According to The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, the bill is on a collision course with a House-backed bill that would keep Georgia’s voting touchscreens for the midterms and call for a switch by 2028. That would allow whoever succeeds Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, who is running for governor, to refine the policy. “We’ll push the deadline,” House Speaker Jon Burns said in an interview this week. “But then let the next secretary of state kind of help hash out the details.” The measure that cleared the Senate on March 27 calls for preprinted, hand-marked paper ballots scanned by machines as the primary method of voting. Voting touchscreens would still be available for voters with disabilities. Using preprinted ballots would require stacks of ballots to accommodate every configuration of districts and races at each early voting site in a county. With the House advancing a competing plan and the session set to end Thursday, the two chambers are either headed toward a last-minute compromise or a stalemate that could force courts to intervene.

Kansas: Kansas Republicans passed a package of legislation that purports to bolster election integrity but evoked warnings from Democrats of potential voter suppression. HB 2569 could eliminate no-excuse mail-in voting if any judge in the state deems the state’s ballot signature verification law to be invalid. It also mandates all voting rights challenges in Kansas be heard in Shawnee County, where a judge who handles civil cases has leaned to the right. HB 2569 initially only contained the provision requiring all voting challenges to be heard in Shawnee County District Court in Topeka. House Elections Committee chairman Rep. Pat Proctor (R-Leavenworth) inserted another proposal during legislative negotiations. It requires the secretary of state to monitor signature verification lawsuits in Kansas, and if any judge decides to invalidate or enjoin a signature requirement, Kansas voters without an excuse — such as temporarily living out of state, sickness, disability or religious belief — would be forbidden from voting in advance by mail.

HB 2437 deputizes the Secretary of State to twice a year cross-reference driver’s license records and state voter rolls against the federal Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements, or SAVE, database. It also restricts voter registration websites to .gov domains or state-approved sites and requires county elections officials to remove people from their voter rolls when a funeral home publishes a person’s obituary. It mandates state agencies that register people to vote, including departments that maintain driver’s license information and public assistance data, share personal information, including Social Security numbers, with the Secretary of State’s Office. The bill contains provisions requiring SAVE data and voter information to be processed securely in a way that adheres to state and federal protection standards. Haskins maintained the SAVE database was not designed as a voter registration verification tool. The House voted 80-43 to pass HB 2437 on March 26.

Kentucky: A routine “elections cleanup bill” that morphed into omnibus legislation making significant changes — like having county clerks verify U.S. citizenship and raising political donations limits — is nearing final passage in the Republican-controlled Kentucky General Assembly. The Senate approved House Bill 139 by a 31-6 party line vote a day after the Senate State and Local Government Committee forwarded the 121-page bill to the full chamber. The bill now needs House consent to the Senate’s changes before the bill can head to the governor’s desk. The bill now has chunks of other election bills that had been moving in the General Assembly, such as eliminating Social Security and public benefits cards as proof of identification to vote and allowing judicial candidates to publicly disclose their political party affiliation. HB 139 would go into effect at the start of 2028, which is the next presidential election year and after the next round of Kentucky’s state elections, including the 2027 governor’s race. Another HB 534 addition would authorize the State Board of Elections to enter agreements with federal agencies to identify deceased people and non-U.S. citizens who are registered to vote in the state. Kentucky election officials are currently facing a lawsuit from the U.S. Department of Justice, which is seeking access to sensitive voter data. The bill requires that someone flagged by the federal data base as a noncitizen could not vote until presenting their county clerk with proof of citizenship, such as a birth certificate, a U.S. passport or Certificate of Naturalization. The county clerk would have to alert the State Board of Elections to the proof. The second bill added into HB 139’s pot is Senate Bill 154, from Sen. Lindsey Tichenor, R-Smithfield, mainly saying that Social Security and public benefits cards cannot be used as proof of a voter’s identity. The original bill passed the Senate in February with a 31-7 vote. The House agreed with the changes this week by a 76-17 vote.

Mississippi: Gov. Tate Reeves (R) signed a bill that adds new citizenship verification requirements to Mississippi’s voter registration process. Senate Bill 2588, also known as the SHIELD Act, would verify citizenship through a federal immigration database. County registrars would check each applicant’s information through the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service’s Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) Program, if it’s not available through the Mississippi Department of Public Safety’s (MDPS) driver’s license and identification information. The SHIELD Act would take effect after July 1, 2026.

Maryland: The House Government, Labor and Elections Committee heard a slate of voting and election reform bills this week with less than two weeks before the legislative session concludes. SB0697 – Social media algorithms and foreign bot interference: This bill would prohibit a social media platform from altering its algorithm to amplify political content that boosts a particular candidate or influences an election without proper disclosure. SB0100 – Requiring buses to stop at early voting centers If signed into law, any public buses with fixed local routes would be required to stop at early voting centers located within one-half mile of the route. The requirement would not apply to buses run by the Maryland Transit Administration or the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority. SB0241 – Restoring voter registration for formerly incarcerated individuals It would require the Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services to promptly send a list of qualified individuals released from prison with their new addresses to the State Board of Elections. This new electronic transmission process would have to be developed and implemented by Jan. 1, 2028. SB0029 – Requiring ballot questions to be written with plain language. At the present, 23 states have some type of law requiring that ballot language be written in a way that is easy to understand and is digestible for voters. Sen. Cheryl Kagan (D-Montgomery County) wants to bring that same requirement to Maryland and read past ballot propositions during the committee hearing to showcase just how convoluted they can appear. SB0141 – Penalizing the use of AI-generated deepfakes to distribute election misinformation. Sen. Katie Fry Hester’s bill (D-Howard and Montgomery) would criminalize the use of artificial intelligence (AI) to spread election misinformation. The bill would allow the state administrator of elections to seek an injunction for the removal of any election misinformation from online platforms and then require the administrator to release the correct information to the public. SB0255 – Maryland Voting Rights Act of 2026 Sen. Charles Sydnor’s (D-Baltimore County) legislation is inspired by the federal Voting Rights Act of 1965, which is currently facing a significant legal challenge in the U.S. Supreme Court. It would prohibit counties and municipalities from weakening the voting power of members of a “protected class,” referring to voters who are part of a racial or language minority. All of the bills await a committee vote, and if released, would then require two votes on the House floor to make it to the governor’s desk for signature.

Oklahoma: A measure seeking to enshrine into the state Constitution a requirement that voters provide identification at the polls is a political stunt, critics said. But supporters of Senate Joint Resolution 47, which easily passed through the Senate last week, said it’s necessary to add the nearly 16-year-old law into the state Constitution to ensure the continued integrity of Oklahoma’s election system in future years. Senate President Pro Tem Lonnie Paxton, R-Tuttle, said the measure is needed to make sure future legislatures don’t remove the voter identification requirement without first holding a public vote. Paxton’s measure asks Oklahoma voters to approve the addition during a special election set for Aug. 25, which is also the runoff date for partisan primaries. Runoff primaries traditionally have the lowest voter turnout. “It’s very clear this is a political bill,” said Senate Minority Leader Julia Kirt, D-Oklahoma City. Kirt said the measure could have been placed on the June primary or November general election ballot. Both elections traditionally see higher turnout. Holding this election three months before November’s general election is designed to undermine trust in Oklahoma’s elections and to raise fears, she said.

South Dakota: Republican Gov. Larry Rhoden signed legislation into law last week that will require people to prove their citizenship when they register to vote in South Dakota state and local elections.. An emergency clause puts the law into effect immediately, before the June 2 primary election, rather than the usual July 1 effective date of new laws. The voter registration deadline for the primary election is May 18. “In South Dakota, we do things right, especially when running our state elections,” Rhoden said in a news release. “This bill ensures only citizens vote in state elections, keeping our elections safe and secure.” The legislation passed South Dakota’s Republican-dominated Legislature earlier this year by votes of 28-6 in the Senate and 64-3 in the House. People already registered to vote don’t need to take any action. Nor do they need to provide proof of citizenship if they’re updating registration information like their address or political party affiliation. Someone who has changed their name and is already registered to vote also won’t need to provide proof of citizenship, according to the South Dakota Secretary of State’s Office. New voters will be required to provide documentation of their U.S. citizenship. One of the acceptable forms of documentation is a driver’s license or nondriver identification card, if the card indicates the person is a citizen. Last year, South Dakota lawmakers adopted a law requiring driver’s licenses to reflect citizenship status.

Legal Updates

Federal Litigation: Democratic Party leaders filed suit April 1 to block President Donald Trump’s attempt to limit voting by mail ahead of the midterm elections. Democrats argue that an executive order, which creates an approved list of absentee voters among other actions, is an unconstitutional interference in the power of states to regulate elections. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries joined the Democratic National Committee, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and the Democratic Governors Association in suing to challenge the order. The White House did not immediately respond to a request for a comment on the lawsuit, but Trump dismissed the possibility of legal challenges to his order at the signing ceremony for the order. “I don’t know how it can be challenged. … You may find a rogue judge,” he told reporters in the Oval Office. “You get a lot of rogue judges, very bad, bad people, very bad judges. But that’s the only way that can be changed, and hopefully we’ll win an appeal.”

Arkansas: A federal appeals court this week upheld an injunction prohibiting Arkansas from enforcing a requirement that all voter registrations be signed in ink. The plaintiffs, Get Loud Arkansas, filed a lawsuit after the State Board of Election Commissioners issued an emergency rule prohibiting digital signatures on voter registrations in the lead up to the 2024 general election. The commission later approved a permanent rule. Voter advocacy group Get Loud Arkansas argued the change violated a provision of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 that prevents states from denying a person their right to vote based on errors or omissions that are immaterial to the person’s voting eligibility. Get Loud said the “wet signature” requirement affected its work by effectively prohibiting the use of an online voter registration tool it had developed. U.S. District Judge Timothy Brooks found that the plaintiffs were likely to succeed with their challenge and issued an injunction, which was later paused while the State Board of Election Commissioners and the secretary of state pursued an appeal to the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The lawsuit on the merits of Get Loud’s complaint is still ongoing. The divided three-judge panel from the 8th Circuit found Brooks had not abused his discretion when he issued the injunction, and agreed that requiring “wet signatures” on all voter registration forms was “immaterial in determining whether an individual is qualified under state law to vote.” “Ample evidence supports this finding,” wrote Chief U.S. Circuit Judge Steven Colloton, who was appointed to the bench by former President George W. Bush. “As the district court explained, the Board did not ‘present argument or evidence as to how a wet signature—as compared to a digital signature—aids in determining whether a person’ is qualified to vote under Arkansas law.”

California: Shasta County Superior Court Judge Benjamin Hanna declined to block an overhaul of the county’s election system from the June primary ballot. Local resident Jennifer Katske filed a lawsuit seeking to keep the measure off the ballot, arguing several provisions would violate state and federal laws. The proposed charter amendment would make sweeping changes to how elections are conducted, including requiring voter identification at polling places, mandating hand counts of ballots and banning universal vote-by-mail. Following a hearing last week, Hanna ruled that Katske’s petition was invalid because it could not point to a specific law that requires a county clerk to pull a ballot measure based on its substance. Hanna did not rule on whether the measure itself is legal. Instead, he said pre-election challenges are an extraordinary step and that any legal review would be more appropriate after voters weigh in. “That litigation would have the benefit of full and complete briefing and analysis without the severe time constraints that this case has involved,” Hanna said in his ruling.

A California appellate court denied the state attorney general’s appeal to halt the Riverside County Sheriff’s election fraud investigation. In a statement, California Attorney General Rob Bonta’s office said the appellate court denied their request “based solely on where we filed the case and is not a ruling on the underlying of the petition.” “The facts have not changed. The Riverside County Sheriff continues to directly defy the Attorney General’s instructions, in violation of the California Constitution and state law,” Bonta’s office wrote. “We are evaluating next steps to ensure a swift and appropriate resolution to this matter.”

CalMatters and a national consortium of news organizations filed a motion in Riverside County court seeking public access to the warrants a judge approved allowing Sheriff Chad Bianco to seize hundreds of thousands of ballots for an unprecedented investigation into the outcome of the November 2025 special election. The groups are also filing a separate petition with the California Supreme Court that also seeks to have the records unsealed.

Florida: John D. Panicci, 59, of Lake Worth was arrested on allegations of theft at the Palm Beach County supervisor of elections office. The sheriff’s office said on March 27, it responded to the Palm Beach County Supervisor of Elections Office on a report of stolen sensitive computer equipment. Sheriff’s office detectives determined that on March 19, the Supervisor of Elections Office conducted a training session for volunteers assisting with the election scheduled for March 24. During the session, Panicci stole an encrypted access key from a voter registration terminal. The sheriff’s office said the key was configured only for training databases. There was concern that a knowledgeable person could potentially reverse engineer the encryption and reintroduce the key into a voter registration kiosk for malicious purposes. On Saturday, March 28, deputies executed a search warrant at Panicci’s home. During the search, detectives recovered the stolen items along with a substantial amount of electronic and digital storage devices. During a court appearance on Sunday morning, Panicci was told not to have contact with the Palm Beach County Supervisor of Elections Office. He is being held in the Palm Beach County Jail on $6,000 bail.

A coalition of voting rights groups filed the suit against HB 991 the same day Governor Ron DeSantis signed it into law. The newly signed law requires proof that someone is a legal resident, like a birth certificate or passport, when registering as a new voter. The League of Women Voters of Florida, Florida Immigrant Coalition, Florida Rising and others are arguing the measure violates the first and fourteenth amendments. They think it places an unneeded strain on voter registration and makes it more likely eligible voters will be blocked. The bill is modeled after the SAVE America act, which the Trump Administration is currently pushing at the federal level. It’s the latest in a host of election law changes passed since 2020 in the state.

Georgia: U.S. District Judge J.P. Boulee will not force the Federal Bureau of Investigation agent who submitted the sworn affidavit in support of the federal agency’s search of Fulton County election hub to testify at an evidentiary hearing. Fulton County had been attempting to get FBI Special Agent Hugh Raymond Evans to speak about the affidavit, arguing that he had “omitted numerous pertinent facts” as part of the basis of the search and seizure of the county’s 2020 election records. In the ruling Boulee said that, while Fulton County disagreed with the Department of Justice’s decision to refuse their attempt to get the FBI agent to testify, that decision was not “arbitrary and capricious.” “While Petitioners note that the contents of SA Evans’s affidavit are already a matter of public record, it does not necessarily follow that the information surrounding the ‘scope of material omissions and erroneous statements’ and SA Evans’s ‘state of mind with respect’ to those matters would remain unprivileged,” Boulee wrote. “In short, given the breadth of the law enforcement privilege and the testimony sought by Petitioners, the Court cannot conclude that DOJ’s decision to prohibit this type of testimony was a clear error of judgment.”

Idaho: The U.S. Justice Department sued Idaho Secretary of State Phil McGrane, and asked a federal judge to force him to turn over the full voter data, which includes partial Social Security numbers and driver’s license numbers. More than a month ago, McGrane declined the Justice Department’s demands for the voter data — even after the Justice Department has sued other states. In December, a Justice Department attorney threatened to sue Idaho if it didn’t turn over the data, according to a voicemail that the Idaho Capital Sun obtained in a public records request. McGrane told the Justice Department in a February letter that he doesn’t believe his office is required under “a clear legal duty” to share Idaho’s full voter roll with the federal government. “Idaho law strictly governs the disclosure of voter information. In the absence of a clear legal requirement that Idaho provide a copy of its complete, unredacted voter list, and in light of my responsibility to protect Idahoans’ personal information, my office will not provide the requested data,” McGrane wrote to the Justice Department in February. In a statement, McGrane said he’s confident “in Idaho’s elections and the efforts we’ve led to ensure secure and accessible elections.” “Idahoans have confidence in how we run our elections,” McGrane told the Sun. “The county clerks and I are committed to ensuring that confidence continues into this year’s mid-term elections.”

Maine: Maine’s highest court is considering whether it is constitutional to expand ranked choice voting to general elections for governor, state representative and state senator. The Supreme Judicial Court heard oral arguments Wednesday in Portland, after the Maine Legislature last month asked for an advisory opinion on LD 1666, which would expand the use of ranked choice voting. Chief Justice Valerie Stanfill and a panel of five associate justices heard arguments that centered on the intentions behind the state’s original Constitution and what constitutes a complete vote. The ruling from the court is not legally binding, but it could still determine if lawmakers send the bill to Gov. Janet Mills, and what she will do with it. At the close of the hearing, Stanfill said the panel of justices are aware of the approaching end of the legislative session, slated for April 15, and will issue a response in due course. But there is a wide assortment of arguments for the court to consider.

Massachusetts: According to WGBH, federal prosecutors launched a new team they said would “actively and aggressively” go after benefit as well as voter fraud in the state. Teasing dozens of investigations already underway, U.S. Attorney Leah Foley said she sees “insufficient guardrails in place in Massachusetts to address the rampant benefit fraud across the state.” Her office has charged 15 people with nearly $9 million in public benefits fraud since December. A pair of assistant U.S. attorneys, Philip Mallard and Mark Grady, will lead the new Benefit and Voter Fraud Team as it investigates cases involving MassHealth, the SNAP food stamp program, childcare subsidies and voting. The press release from the U.S. Attorney’s Office announcing the Benefit and Voter Fraud Team highlighted the recent benefits cases but did not mention specific instances of voter fraud in Massachusetts.

Michigan: The Michigan Court of Appeals has ruled that 37 disputed ballots in the Hamtramck mayoral contest should be counted, potentially reversing the outcome of the election almost three months into the new mayor’s term. Adam Alharbi narrowly won the November 2025 election for mayor of the small Detroit suburb by just 11 votes and has been serving as the city’s mayor since January. He beat Muhith Mahmood, a former council member, in the nonpartisan race. Three days after the election, 37 uncounted absentee ballots were discovered, opened but still in their envelopes, in the city clerk’s office. The clerk delivered the ballots to the county, but it was later revealed that unauthorized city officials had entered the clerk’s office while the ballots were there. This broke the ballots’ chain of custody, raising questions about whether they should be counted. The Wayne County Board of Canvassers deadlocked on whether to count the ballots, leaving the election results as they stood without the ballots’ inclusion. Mahmood sued over that decision on behalf of himself and the 37 disenfranchised voters, whose identities remain unknown. A lower court ruled in December that the board of canvassers was within its rights to exclude the ballots. But in a 2-1 decision last week, Court of Appeals judges said that excluding the ballots “effectively denied 37 voters their fundamental right to vote” under the state constitution and that, under state law, “mistakes made by election officials must not result in the rejection of a ballot cast by an eligible voter.”

Nebraska: The Nebraska Supreme Court heard oral arguments this week in a lawsuit that had tried and failed to stop the state from handing over potentially sensitive parts of its voter data to the U.S. Department of Justice. Daniel Gutman, one of the attorneys for voting advocacy group Common Cause and Omaha voter Dawn Essink, asked the high court to reverse a Lancaster County District Court ruling that Common Cause lacked standing to sue because the alleged harm was speculative and not imminent. The Nebraska Supreme Court agreed to hear the case but had already denied an injunction request that would have prevented Evnen from handing the voter data to the Justice Department. Evnen gave the feds the data in February. This was touched on during oral arguments, as some justices asked if the case mattered anymore since the data had been handed over. Gutman argued it still matters because, “if the federal government comes knocking,” there isn’t anything the state’s top election official could do to protect voters’ information based on the lower courts’ ruling. Nebraska Solicitor General Cody Barnett, arguing on behalf of Secretary of State Bob Evnen, the state’s top elections official, asked the court to affirm the lower court decision, saying it was too late to stop the data from being shared.

New York: Kevin Sweet, 42 of Hudson was arraigned on a sealed indictment this week that alleges he attempted to obtain a mail-in ballot for the 2024 fall election in the name of a deceased person. Sweet faces eight counts – four felonies and four misdemeanors – in connection with the incident brought to light when the Columbia County Board of Elections discovered the attempted illegal act and presented its findings to law enforcement. faces eight counts – four felonies and four misdemeanors – in connection with the incident brought to light when the Columbia County Board of Elections discovered the attempted illegal act and presented its findings to law enforcement. The indictment, issued by a Columbia County Grand Jury March 24 and unsealed March 25 in front of Judge Brian Herman, charges Sweet with Procuring Fraudulent Documents in Order to Vote, an unclassified felony; Falsifying Business Records in the First Degree, a Class E felony; Perjury in the Second Degree, a Class E felony; Offering a False Instrument for Filing in the First Degree, a Class E felony; Falsifying Business Records in the Second Degree, a Class A misdemeanor; Perjury in the Third Degree, a Class A misdemeanor; Offering a False Instrument for Filing in the Second Degree, a Class A misdemeanor; and Illegal Voting, a Class A misdemeanor. Each Class E felony carries a maximum sentence of between one-and-a-third to four years in prison while the Class A misdemeanors carry a maximum sentence of one year in jail. Sweet is set to return to court April 29, 2026.

North Carolina: Middle District of North Carolina Judge Loretta Copeland Biggs struck down a challenge to North Carolina’s long-contested voter ID law last week, finding that the North Carolina NAACP failed to establish that the law was an unconstitutional infringement of Black and Latino voters’ rights in light of recent higher court rulings. The challenge concerned North Carolina Senate Bill 824, passed in December 2018 over Gov. Roy Cooper’s veto, which requires voters to present photo identification before casting their ballots. The lawsuit alleged that the bill is racially discriminatory against Black and Latino voters, who disproportionately lack access to qualifying photo identification. In her ruling, Biggs made clear that she felt recent appellate and Supreme Court precedent prevented her from finding sufficient evidence of discrimination from voter ID laws, despite an unequal burden placed on voters of different races and historic voting discrimination against non-white voters. “The record before this Court makes clear that it is simply much more difficult for racial minorities to vote and to have their vote counted,” Biggs wrote. “Even in the shadow of significant evidence of disparate impact, the law of the case doctrine compels the conclusion that the record before this Court does not establish discriminatory intent.” The case, Biggs said, was not to determine whether North Carolina would require voter ID, as a 2018 constitutional amendment had already enshrined that in state law, but whether the subsequent bill implementing that requirement was racially discriminatory. “In making this determination, the Court must follow the law of the United States Supreme Court and the Fourth Circuit,” Biggs wrote.

U.S. District Judge Thomas Schroeder upheld a 2023 North Carolina law allowing voter registrations to be denied after just one address verification card is returned as undeliverable, marking a second victory for the General Assembly’s ballot restrictions in just one day. Previously, voters would receive two mailed address verification requests from the State Board of Elections before their registration would be denied and their ballot canceled. The provision was blocked from going into effect for the 2024 election by Schroeder, who ultimately upheld the law March 26, and so it will first apply to the upcoming 2026 election. A trio of civil rights groups — Democracy North Carolina, the North Carolina Black Alliance, and the League of Women Voters of North Carolina — challenged the law, known as Senate Bill 747, in 2023, a week after it passed over Gov. Roy Cooper’s veto. Schroeder ruled that the civil rights groups failed to demonstrate that the legislature passed S.B. 747 with intent to discriminate against any group of voters. “A legislature is entitled to make such policy choices and is not precluded from improving its electoral system because of its inability to perfect it,” Schroeder wrote. “Nor should election changes become a one-way ratchet, incapable of alteration merely because some voters may be affected.” He also noted that the State Board of Elections sends a “Notice to Verify Your Address” by mail and email if the county board receives the undeliverable verification card at least two days before the election canvass, providing voters a second opportunity to cure their ballots.

Pennsylvania: The U.S. Supreme Court declined to take up an appeal by Fulton County accusing a voting systems company of breach of contract following the 2020 election. Fulton County appealed to the highest court of the land after its lawsuit against the former Dominion Voting Systems was dismissed by lower courts. The county, through the Fulton County Board of Elections, current county commissioner Randy Bunch, and former county commissioner Stuart Ulsh, filed suit against the company, now known as Liberty Vote, in September 2022. At issue was the agreement between Fulton County and Dominion to provide voting systems and a dispute stemming from an allegation that there were “severe anomalies” in voter data generated following the Nov. 2020 election. Originally filed in Fulton County Court, the case was removed to federal court and dismissed in August of 2024. On March 23, the court denied certiorari, effectively dismissing the case.

John Pollard, 63 of Philadelphia has been sentenced to 10 months in federal prison for threatening to kill a western Pennsylvania poll worker, including saying he would skin them alive. Pollard was also ordered by Chief U.S. District Judge Cathy Bissoon in Pittsburgh to serve one year of supervised release after he serves his sentence and was fined $5,000. The judge rejected Pollard’s request for probation noting that “political violence is real” and that death threats are unacceptable, U.S. Attorney Tony Rivetti said. Rivetti said the sentence “sends a clear and unmistakable message that threats against election workers and other public servants will be met with swift, certain and just punishment.”

Texas: The Campaign Legal Center filed a lawsuit on behalf of multiple voting rights and advocacy organizations against the Texas Secretary of State’s Office and some county election officials to prevent the removal of voters from the state’s voter roll based on use of a federal database to verify citizenship. They also claim the state failed to crosscheck its own records for proof of citizenship it already possessed before seeking to remove voters. In the lawsuit, filed in a federal district court in Austin Thursday, the plaintiffs said the database, known as SAVE, is unreliable, and that Texas’ use of it to remove people from the rolls, including some who are naturalized U.S. citizens, is a violation of the National Voter Registration Act. The plaintiffs said in the filing, which cited reporting by Votebeat and other news outlets, that the Secretary of State’s Office “did not consult Department of Public Safety data—a known source that could confirm citizenship for many registered voters—before placing the burden on the voter to provide documentary proof.” The plaintiffs want the court to declare that the state’s removal of voters from the rolls using the SAVE database violates the National Voter Registration Act, and want the court to prohibit the Texas Secretary of State’s Office from sending lists of potential noncitizens to the counties without “further, uniform investigation,” the lawsuit says. They also asked the court to prohibit the state and county election officials from removing people from the voter roll “solely because they have been flagged as noncitizens by the SAVE system” and to order that anyone who was removed be placed back on the voter roll until “it can be conclusively proved that such voters are not currently U.S. citizens”.










NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote! Michael H. Drucker