Ballot Measures, Legislation & Rulemaking
Michigan Ballot Measure: The Michigan Bureau of Elections issued a report this week determining that a proposed amendment to the state constitution requiring residents to prove their citizenship when voting may not have submitted enough valid signatures. While Americans for Citizen Voting – Michigan submitted 709,841 signatures on its petitions, well over the 446,198 needed to make the ballot, the Bureau of Elections estimates only 434,423 signatures are valid after reviewing a random sample of 1,000 signatures. After considering a challenge to the signatures filed by Promote the Vote Action and attorney Bob Labrant, former general counsel to the Michigan Chamber of Commerce, the Bureau of Elections determined that 612 of the signatures were valid. The bureau advises against certifying the petition if a review of the sample returns 628 or fewer valid signatures. The Board of State Canvassers will meet on Aug. 24, where the bipartisan, four-member board will determine whether the petition is sufficient, though canvassers typically follow the bureau’s recommendation. The measure would require residents to show a photo identification before casting their ballot and establish new voter roll verifications, requiring the Secretary of State to review the rolls and remove any noncitizens. It would also add language to the state constitution noting that only U.S. citizens can vote in local, state and federal elections.
Lincoln, Nebraska Ballot Measure: Good Government Lincoln, a conservative organization seeking to reshape Lincoln municipal elections turned in a second set of signatures this week in hopes of reaching the November ballot. The proposed charter amendments would move the dates of city elections from odd years to even years, let certain residents within a 3-mile buffer of Lincoln city limits vote in municipal elections and limit future Lincoln City Council members to two consecutive four-year terms. This is the second time the campaign has turned in signatures. The first time, more than 65% of signatures were rejected, with a majority flagged as possibly fraudulent. To date, six out-of-state circulators have been arrested. Law enforcement is searching for a seventh. Supporters need at least 4,981 valid signatures on each petition from this new batch of signatures. The Lancaster County Election Commission, which flagged signatures suspected to be fraudulent the first time, will again be charged with reviewing the signatures.
Onondaga County, New York: A new resolution proposed in the Onondaga County Legislature would seek to prevent armed federal immigration officials from accessing non-public areas at polling sites. It would also require the board of elections to put up signage around the polling sites reminding voters of their rights. The resolution “reaffirms” that the presence of members of three government law agencies — U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Customs and Border Protection, and Border Patrol — might constitute intimidation of voters, which is illegal under state and federal laws. It adds that poll workers are not obligated to invite or admit these officials into polling places, and adds that the federal agents, armed or not, cannot be within an election space with the goal of interfering with elections or intimidating voters. Each of these things is covered by state and federal laws. Electioneering within 100 feet of the entrance of the polling place is prohibited under state law, and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 made it illegal to intimidate, threaten, or coerce voters. The resolution also requires the county to identify and distribute a protocol responding to the presence of ICE at polling places and to post know-your-rights signage at the 100-foot mark from polling sites. “We are in unprecedented times,” said Legislator Ellen Block, who drafted the legislation, adding that voters were nervous about who might be at polling places this year. “It can be very nerve-racking, so we’re not here to show any extra nervousness, but to reassure people that we are looking out for their best interests.”
North Carolina: Gov. Josh Stein (D) vetoed a controversial elections law bill on August 17, saying the veto was necessary to defend voting rights. House Bill 958 includes provisions that would reduce early voting periods during primaries and special elections, require state Auditor Dave Boliek to conduct post-election audits of county election systems, and use federal databases with known problems to identify people who have died but remain on the voter rolls. Republicans said the changes would make elections more secure and more efficient, but Democrats called it a “power grab.” “Our right to vote is precious. It’s the fundamental right that underpins every other right that we possess,” Stein said during a ceremony at the executive mansion, flanked by Democratic state lawmakers. “That’s why I will always protect you and your right to vote, and that’s why I am vetoing this anti-voter law today.” In both chambers of the legislature, only Republicans voted to pass H958. Republicans hold a three-fifths supermajority in the Senate, allowing them to override a gubernatorial veto along party lines. But they don’t have a supermajority in the House, so Stein’s veto could withstand a legislative challenge unless Democrats or unaffiliated lawmakers vote with GOP lawmakers. House Republicans plan to try to override the veto, according to Rep. Hugh Blackwell, R-Burke, chair of the House Election Law Committee.
Deschutes County, Oregon: A petition to introduce ranked choice voting to Deschutes County for future county commissioner races will not be on the November ballot. Proponents failed to secure the 6,500 signatures needed to qualify by the deadline. Organizers said though efforts to gather signatures ramped up throughout August, but the team is now looking to bolster a fall campaign and work to defeat a controversial district map measure that will be on the November ballot after commissioners finalized language around it earlier this month. Ranked choice petition organizers said they plan to continue to collect signatures through the fall. Though the November deadline will have passed, every petition has two years to gather the required number of signatures to get an issue onto a future ballot. The county clerk’s office needs at least 30 days to process and verify signatures for a petition in order to get it on the next ballot, said Deschutes County Clerk Steve Dennison.
Legal Updates
Federal Litigation: Columbus, Ohio, Nashville, Tennessee, and El Paso and Harris counties in Texas have all filed suit against the Department of Homeland security over new requirements for federal grants that they argue undermine election security and public safety. In June, the Federal Emergency Management Agency announced it would withhold 20% of DHS’ Homeland Security Grant Program funds unless grantees complied with five requirements that would shift how local officials conduct their elections. The new requirements include a mandatory transition from voting machines that accept QR and bar codes to ones that take paper ballots, conducting manual ballot audits and running voter registration through DHS’ Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements system, better known as the SAVE system. The SAVE system has repeatedly been flagged for misidentifying voters as noncitizens, however the Trump administration has nevertheless pushed for its use amid false claims that millions of noncitizens are registered to vote. In late July, Texas’ Secretary of State’s Office directed county officials to reinstate some of the 2,724 registered voters who were flagged as potential noncitizens by the SAVE system. The counties and cities suing argued in their petition that implementing the requirements would cost millions and make their elections less secure, while placing roughly $200 million in grant funds at stake nationally.
Arizona: Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Adele Ponce has rejected claims by a conservative legal group that accused Secretary of State Adrian Fontes of trying to mislead voters and get them to reject a Republican-crafted ballot measure that seeks to make several major changes in state election laws. In a new ruling Ponce said Arizona law requires the secretary to prepare language that appears on each ballot explaining the effects it would have if approved. And the judge acknowledged that Fontes did not mention each and every provision in the explanation of Proposition 144. But she said the secretary did not break the law. In filing suit, James Rogers, an attorney with America First Legal, complained that the explanation prepared by Fontes did not mention that one section would spell out that “only citizens may register and vote in Arizona elections.” Another says that elections in Arizona “shall be decided solely by the votes of eligible citizen voters.” Fontes, however, has taken the position that all that already is state law, and nothing in Prop. 144 would change all that. And Ponce said it was his decision to make. “Giving the secretary the deference due under the law, the court finds the description’s inclusions or omissions are neither false nor clearly misleading,” the judge wrote. Plaintiffs have appealed to the state Supreme Court. The Supreme Court rejected the arguments that the Republicans who crafted Proposition 144 had put too many things into a single take-it-or-leave-it package. Tempe City Councilman Randy Keating said each of the provisions should have to be offered to voters on their own merits. Justice John Lopez disagreed. “These provisions are interrelated because each regulate the same context — the conduct of public elections,” he wrote for himself and three other justices. Lopez said it’s irrelevant that each of the proposed changes could be presented to voters separately. But Chief Justice Ann Scott Timmer and Justice Maria Elena Cruz said two of the changes that Prop. 144 would make are not sufficiently interrelated to be presented to voters as a single package.
Colorado: The U.S. Department of Justice has appealed a federal judge’s decision to dismiss its case against Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold, from whom it’s trying to pry sensitive voter information. The department sued Colorado in December to demand a copy of its statewide voter registration list that includes full names, dates of birth, addresses and identification numbers. The department first requested that information in May 2025, and then again in December after Griswold shared only publicly available voter information. “The DOJ has lost every lawsuit and appeal they have filed in their attempts to access sensitive voter information from the states,” Griswold said in a statement. “Trump and his DOJ have no right to Coloradans’ sensitive voter information, and we hope the District Court’s decision is upheld.” The Trump administration has said it has sought voter information from states to ensure compliance with federal election laws. None of the laws the federal government used to justify its request — the Civil Rights Act of 1960, the National Voter Registration Act and the Help America Vote Act — require disclosure of the sensitive data.
Georgia: Conservative filmmaker Dinesh D’Souza has settled a defamation lawsuit filed by a Gwinnett County man in 2022, avoiding a trial that was set to begin Monday in federal court in Atlanta. The settlement, details of which were not disclosed, ends a yearslong legal battle for Mark Andrews, an auditor from Gwinnett, falsely portrayed in the movie “2000 Mules” as a “ballot mule.” The suit centered on a seconds-long clip of surveillance video featured in the documentary showing Andrews returning absentee ballots for himself and four family members at a drop box before the 2020 election. State investigators cleared Andrews, confirming he indeed was legally returning ballots for family members. D’Souza later acknowledged he was wrong and apologized to Andrews. Attorneys for D’Souza and True the Vote blamed each other in federal court last year. While D’Souza’s attorneys said that True the Vote’s research had misled D’Souza into believing Andrews was a “ballot mule,” True the Vote said it cannot be held accountable for what D’Souza said in the documentary. True the Vote was removed as a defendant in the lawsuit in November, according to court records.
Illinois: The lawsuit over Evanston’s adoption of ranked choice voting is being reset once again, as a Cook County judge dismissed the case August 13 so the plaintiffs can add the Illinois State Board of Elections and Dominion Voting Systems as parties. Evanston voters overwhelmingly approved a November 2022 referendum to use ranked choice in city elections starting in the April 2025 cycle, but the county clerk’s office, which runs suburban elections, asserted it can’t implement the system without changes to state law. This led to a lawsuit from nonprofit Reform for Illinois in July 2024, which Judge Maureen Ward Kirby dismissed that November. But the Illinois Appellate Court overturned her ruling in June 2025 due to the city government not being a party. Judge Ward Kirby dismissed the case again “without prejudice” — meaning it can be refiled — “due to failure to name necessary parties.” She also gave the plaintiffs explicit permission to file an amended complaint.
Indiana: Three votes now separate Republican Paula Copenhaver from state Sen. Spencer Deery, but a dispute over six rejected ballots could reverse the outcome of their Indiana Senate primary for a second time. Deery’s attorneys asked the Indiana Supreme Court to take the recount case and the Court of Appeals to suspend the result while judges determine whether the six ballots were wrongly rejected over omissions by election workers. The Indiana Recount Commission unanimously dismissed Copenhaver’s election contest on Aug. 10 but issued a recount certificate showing her with 6,332 votes and Deery with 6,329. That reversed the original certified results, which showed Deery winning the May 5 Republican primary by the same three-vote margin, 6,337 to 6,334. Deery’s appeal is limited to six ballots from Montgomery, Vermillion and Warren counties that lacked a circuit court clerk’s seal and signature. The ballots were cast for Deery, according to his filings, so counting them would put him back ahead by three votes. One of Monday’s filings asks the Indiana Supreme Court to accept an emergency transfer of the case from the Court of Appeals. The other asks the appeals court to stay the Recount Commission’s certification and temporarily stop election officials from placing Copenhaver’s name on general-election ballots while the dispute is reviewed.
Kentucky: Jefferson County Clerk David Yates said his office will take legal action to get judicial guidance on how to handle the reassignment of dozens of voters on the Jefferson-Oldham County line. Yates plans to file a Petition for a Declaration of Rights. With that action, the Franklin County Circuit Court can “provide guidance regarding the duties of election officials, the rights of affected voters, and the legal effect of election residency determinations when those determinations appear inconsistent with other governmental records.” “My office has a responsibility to maintain accurate voter registration records and to follow Kentucky election law,” Yates said in a statement. “At the same time, residents have raised legitimate questions that deserve clear answers and a fair process. Rather than have election officials resolve those questions independently, I believe the courts are the appropriate forum to provide clarity, consistency, and confidence for everyone involved.” Questions about which county voters reside in were prompted by a review of voter information Yates’ office began earlier this year after eight voters were unable to vote in the 44th House District primary. Yates appeared before a legislative committee Tuesday morning with Franklin County Clerk Jeff Hancock to discuss how a 2022 law to centralize state mapping may not reflect what’s happening at the local level. Yates said in some cases where a person resides on a county line, they may pay taxes in one county but vote in another.
Michigan: The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals has denied the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) request to rehear a lawsuit seeking Michigan’s unredacted voter list with personal information. Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel filed the motion to dismiss the lawsuit to protect the Michigan residents’ Social Security numbers, birth dates, driver’s licenses and ID card numbers. Nessel did this on behalf of the Michigan Department of State and the State of Michigan. In the lawsuit, the DOJ argued it had a right to Michigan voter information under the Civil Rights Act of 1960. This was rejected by the United States District Court for the Western District of Michigan, concluding that the electronic voter list is not a paper or record that comes from an election official’s possession for the purposes of disclosure under the Civil Rights Act. The Sixth Circuit affirmed this decision. The DOJ petitioned for rehearing en banc, where the entire bench of judges in the Court of Appeals rehear a case instead of the usual three judges of the appellate panel, but the Sixth Circuit was unpersuaded. “Courts have made it clear that the federal government does not have the right to demand the personal data of millions of Michigan voters, and I am relieved the Sixth Circuit stood by its decision” said Nessel.
Attorney General Dana Nessel announced last week she was charging five noncitizens for allegedly voting in the 2024 general election, plus one U.S. citizen accused of registering their noncitizen spouse to vote. Nessel made the announcement more than a year after her office announced she was investigating 13 potential noncitizen voters referred by the Michigan Department of State. Thursday’s announcement encompassed those referrals as well as 25 other people referred more recently on similar allegations. In addition to the six who were charged, 10 of those cases have been closed without charges, and 22 remain under investigation. In addition, the voter registration of every identified noncitizen — including several who were not charged — has been canceled. The six people were each arraigned between April and earlier this week, according to Nessel’s office. Of the six, three live in the U.S. as lawful permanent residents, while a fourth is a limited-term alien resident.
The Michigan Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal from the city of Hamtramck, the Wayne County Board of Canvassers and current Hamtramck Mayor Adam Alharbi, leaving in place a March decision from the Michigan Court of Appeals that ordered the ballots counted. The parties could appeal to federal courts, but such a challenge would face significant expenses, not to mention legal hurdles. These 37 ballots weren’t counted on Election Day after mistakenly being left in their opened envelopes and returned to the clerk’s office. They were later discovered there, but only after outside officials had entered the office — allegedly to address punching bags bearing candidates’ faces that had been left inside — thus breaking the ballots’ chain of custody. The Wayne County Board of Canvassers deadlocked over whether to include the ballots in the final count because of concerns about the chain of custody, leaving the votes uncounted. Those 37 ballots could now decide the mayoral race months after Alharbi — who beat his opponent Muhith Mahmood by only 11 votes — took office.
Minnesota: U.S. District Judge Katherine Menendez dismissed a Trump administration lawsuit seeking Minnesota voter rolls. The Department of Justice is now 0-23 in its effort to obtain voter information maintained by the states. The U.S. Department of Justice sued Minnesota Secretary of State Steve Simon in September over his refusal to hand over Minnesota’s voter registration list, which includes voters’ names, birthdates, addresses and partial Social Security numbers. “The government suggests it is permitted to use a civil action as a ‘fishing expedition,’” U.S. District Judge Katherine Menendez wrote in her order dismissing the case. “But an ordinary litigant isn’t allowed to seek discovery first and allege a claim later, and the federal government has no special privilege to do so either.”
The Minnesota Supreme Court has granted a petition requiring the City of Minneapolis and City Clerk Casey Carl to appoint and assign election judges to staff early voting polling places during the 18-day in-person early voting period before the Nov. 3, 2026 general election. The per curiam order, issued Aug. 14stems from a petition filed by the Minnesota Voters Alliance and Diane Napper. The petitioners alleged that the city had made no preparations to staff early voting polling places with election judges in 2026, despite Minnesota law requiring election judges to handle specific duties. Early voting legislation was enacted in 2023 and is being implemented for the first time in 2026, following the secretary of state’s May 15, 2026 certification regarding the statewide voter registration system. The court rejected jurisdictional challenges raised by the city, ruling that the Minnesota Voters Alliance has standing, the petition is ripe, and the claims fall within the scope of state law. The court directed that election judge appointments be made consistent with Minn. Stat. § 204B.21, subd. 2. Appointments are to be made from precinct lists furnished by the Secretary of State, with provisions allowing appointments of other qualified individuals—including non-party-affiliated persons or those willing to travel—if lists are exhausted.
The Minnesota Supreme Court found the appeals court properly ruled that Minnesota’s witness certification requirement for absentee voting does not violate the Voting Rights Act or the Civil Rights Act. The court finds the witness requirement for unregistered absentee voters does not require that witness to “prove” or “personally assure” the voter information is accurate, therefore they cannot be defined as a “voucher” that would violate the Voting Rights Act.
Nevada: The U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada granted a motion to dismiss a U.S. Department of Justice lawsuit seeking Nevada’s unredacted statewide voter registration list. The court also denied the Justice Department’s motion to compel the production of the records. “Today’s ruling is a victory for Nevada voters and their right to have their sensitive personal information protected,” Aguilar said. The Justice Department sought Nevada’s complete, unredacted voter-registration list, including voters’ driver’s license and Social Security numbers. Nevada directed the Justice Department to the state’s publicly available voter list but declined to disclose information protected under Nevada law. The Department argued that Title III of the Civil Rights Act of 1960 authorized it to obtain Nevada’s complete voter-registration list. In dismissing the lawsuit, U.S. District Judge Anne R. Traum found that the statewide voter-registration list is not the type of record subject to disclosure under the provision cited by DOJ. The court also found that DOJ failed to provide the factual basis and purpose required to support its demand.
Virginia: An man accused of posing as an FBI agent at an active Fairfax County polling place nearly two years ago — while wearing a pellet gun resembling a pistol — was arrested Monday and has been indicted on two federal charges, according to court documents. A federal grand jury charged Alex Nguyen with impersonating a federal officer and acting as such, as well as possessing imitation federal law enforcement credentials. An indictment and prosecution motion were filed on Thursday and relate to an incident that occurred on Nov. 5, 2024 — Election Day — in Great Falls. The charges were filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. The FBI began investigating Nguyen for allegedly impersonating an agent at an active election polling location, prosecutors wrote in a motion seeking to keep the indictment sealed until his arrest. After the incident, Nguyen admitted that he presented election workers with fake FBI credentials and a fake FBI badge, according to prosecutors. The government also said Nguyen wore a pellet gun designed to resemble a Glock pistol. Federal prosecutors did not seek to detain Nguyen while the case is pending.
Washington: Thurston County Superior Court Christine Schaller says a Grays Harbor County election was “not properly conducted,” sharply criticizing county officials for conduct that “shocks the conscience,” while ordering the county to pay nearly $70,000 for intentionally withholding public records related to the 2023 election. Schaller made the comments during a July 24 hearing involving a public records lawsuit brought by Ocean Shores Mayor Frank Elduen and his wife, Kerin Elduen. Schaller admonished Grays Harbor County Auditor Joseph MacLean, and the county’s elections administrator, Scott Turnbull, over their handling of records concerning the election and a change in the order of candidates on the ballot. She said the court had uncovered “very unethical behaviors” by the two officials and described their conduct as “interference with the election process.” But Schaller also made clear she was not ruling that election laws had been violated. She said she could not impose a penalty for the alleged election interference because the issue was outside the scope of the public records case. “I cannot enter a penalty that punishes the Auditor and Mr. Turnbull for the actual behavior as it relates to what they did in that election, which I’ve already indicated is — it’s terrible,” Schaller said. “I’m not the fact finder on those issues, but it seems very intentional and willful what they did.”
Michael H. Drucker
