Thursday, March 28, 2024

Congress Raids Old Presidential Campaign Fund


Congress quietly Drained Millions, from a largely Unused Presidential Campaign Fund, to provide a jolt of Cash to the U.S. Secret Service and State's Election Security Grants.

The Presidential Election Campaign Fund, which publicly Funded White House Aspirants’ Campaigns from the 1970s to late 2000s, will now provide $320 million to the Secret Service and $55 million for Election Security Ggrants, as a part of the $1.2 Trillion Funding Package, that Averted a Partial Government Shutdown.

Was unable to confirm which Member or Members of Congress, are responsible for inserting the Language in the middle of the 1,012-page Bill, that tapped the Fund to the tune of $375 million, Funding Major Government Departments through September.

The Secret Service, which provides Security for the President, Vice President, Prsidential Candidates, along with Foreign Heads of State, can use the Funds for a variety of purposes: from Purchasing Vehicles to Overtime Pay, to Travel Accommodations.

Trump has Refused to Reimburse Local Law Enforcement, at His Presidential State Campaign Rallies, and the Secret Service has previously Stated that it Cannot Reimburse Municipal Governments for these Public Safety Costs, because it hasn't received Money from Congress to do so.









NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote! Michael H. Drucker


RNC Might Limit NBC’s Access At 2024 Convention


The Republican National Committee (RNC) is weighing whether to Restrict NBC’s access to this summer’s Convention, following the Network’s Decision to Drop former RNC Chair Ronna McDaniel, as a Contributor.

Such a move would mark a Dramatic Escalation in the growing rift between Trump-Allies and the TV Network.

“We are taking a hard look at what this means for NBC’s participation at the convention,” said Danielle Alvarez, a Spokesperson for the RNC and the Trump Campaign. “Our priority is making sure this is a world class event that allows President Trump to feature his message and vision in a fair way.”

But any attempt to Restrict the Network’s Access at the Convention, would likely engender Strong Pushback from Top Brass there, as well as Organizations tasked with representing the Media and, potentially, Rival Journalists and Outlets.

A Major Showdown with the Press, at the biggest Political Event of the Election Cycle, could prove to be an Unwanted Distraction for Republicans. That is especially true for a Presidential Nominee who takes Heavy interest in the Media Coverage He receives.

The RNC has followed through on Threats to TV Networks before, including cutting out NBC from Hosting a Debate in the 2016 Primary. But the Summer Convention is a far Bigger Stage with much Larger Electoral Consequences.

It’s also not certain how much Control the Committee possesses over Media Access to the Cconvention. The Event requires the Coordination of the Republican Party, Convention Hall Officials, and Local and State Aauthorities.

Rob Zatkowski, the Director of the House Periodical Press Gallery, said that the RNC, which was recently taken over by Trump Allies, did Not have actual Control over which Outlets can be Credentialed for the Convention.

“[If] the publication is credentialed on Capitol Hill, and one of the parties asked that the publication not be credentialed for the convention, we would credential the publication anyway. To my knowledge this has never happened before,” said Zatkowski.

NBC is expected to have One of the Larger Media footprints at the Conventions this year.









NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote! Michael H. Drucker


Federal Court Rules SC Can Use Unconstitutional Congressional Map


A Federal Court said Thursday, that it will allow a U.S. House Election in South Carolina, for Rep. Nancy Mace’s (R-1st District) Seat, to proceed under a Map it had previously declared Unconstitutional.

In a brief Order, the Judges in the Case, said they had little choice, given a fast-approaching Deadline to prepare for the Primary Election for the Sstate’s Down-Ballot Contests.

Last year, the Three-Judge Panel held, that the State’s GOP-controlled Legislature had “Exiled” more than 30,000 Black Residents from the Coastal 1st Congressional District, which is anchored in Charleston County, in what the Court called a “Bleaching” to Benefit Republicans.

That amounted to an Unconstitutional Racial Gerrymander, the Judges concluded.

South Carolina Officials Appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, and the Justices heard Arguments in the Ccase in October, 2023. At the time, the Conservative Justices in the Majority, seemed skeptical of Arguments that the State’s Lawmakers had engaged in Impermissible Racial Gerrymandering, in Drawing the District Lines.

But the High Court has Not yet issued an Opinion in the Case. Courts have in the Past permitted Gerrymandering for Partisan reasons, but Racial Gerrymandering has been deemed Illegal.

With the State facing Deadlines, to start preparing and sending Absentee Ballots to Overseas and Military Voters for the June 11th Primary, it’s “plainly impractical” to Order a New Map, theJjudges said in Thursday’s Order.

They said they recognized that it’s Unusual to allow an Election to proceed under a Map they had deemed Invalid. “But with the primary election procedures rapidly approaching, the appeal before the Supreme Court still pending, and no remedial plan in place,” the Judges said, “the ideal must bend to the practical.”

Mace faces a Competitive Republican Primary, in Her bid for a Third Term. Challengers include former State Cabinet Official Catherine Templeton, and Mace’s Onetime Chief of Staff Daniel Hanlon, has also filed to Run.

Mace earlier this month, received the Endorsement of Trump, who called Her a “strong conservative voice.”

A Onetime Trump Critic, Mace has since become an Outspoken Ally.

What had been a Competitive District, was Redrawn by State Republicans in 2022, to become Safer for their Party. Trump would have carried the 1st District under its current Lines by 9 points in 2020.

Mace won Re-Election in 2022 by 14 points, after Winning the Seat under the previous Map, by a Single Point Two years earlier.









NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote! Michael H. Drucker


KY Bill Strips Governor Of Power To Appoint Senator


Kentucky Senate sent a Bill to Gov. Andy Beshear (D) Thursday, that would Strip him of His Power to Appoint People to the U.S. Senate.

The Bill seeks to hold Special Elections for Senate Vacancies in Kentucky.

The Legislation’s passage through the State Senate, follows the Announcement that Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY), 82, would Step Down from His Position as Senate Minority Leader, at the end of the year.

Republican State House Majority Floor Leader Steven Rudy (R-1st District), the Bill’s Main Sponsor, has said the Legislation doesn’t have to do with McConnell, but rather His Positio,n on how a Vacant Senate Seat should be filled.

The Kentucky State Senate, sent the Bill to Beshear in a 34-3 Vote. Beshear, a Governor in a deeply Red State, has pushed back against the Bill, as having a background in Partisanship.

In His Speech, announcing His Decision to leave His Leadership position last month, McConnell said He is “not going anywhere any time soon. However, I will complete my job my colleagues have given me until we select a new leader in November and they take the helm next January,”.

McConnell said He started taking a second look at His Career Plans, following the death of His Sister-in-Law, Angela Chow, in a Car Crash in Early February.

“When you lose a loved one, particularly at a young age, there’s a certain introspection that accompanies the grieving process. Perhaps it is God’s way of reminding you of your own life’s journey to prioritize the impact of the world that we will all inevitably leave behind,” He said, noting His recent birthday. “I turned 82 last week. The end of my contributions are closer than I’d prefer.”









NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote! Michael H. Drucker


MT Supreme Court Rejects Passed Voting Restrictions Laws


Montana Supreme Court on Wednesday, Struck Down Four Voting Restrictions Passed by the State’s Republican-controlled Legislature in 2021.

In a 125-page Opinion, the State’s Highest Court Affirmed a Lower Court’s Ruling, that the Four Laws, Passed in the wake of Trump’s 2020 Election Loss, Violate the State Constitution.

The Laws:

- Ended Same-Day Voter Registration.

- Removed Student ID Cards as a Form of Voter ID.

- Prohibited Third Parties from Returning Ballots.

- Barred the Distribution of Mail-in-Ballots to Voters who would turn 18 by Election day.

After a Nine-day Trial, the Lower Court found that the Laws, would make it Harder for some State Residents to Register to Vote and Cast a Ballot.

A Spokesperson for the Secretary-of-State, Christi Jacobsen (R), who Appealed the Lower Court Decision, in an attempt to get the Laws Reinstated, said that She was “devastated” by the Supreme Court Decision.

“Her commitment to election integrity will not waver by this narrow adoption of judicial activism that is certain to fall on the wrong side of history,” the Spokesperson, Richie Melby, wrote in a Statement. “State and county election officials have been punched in the gut.”

The Montana Democratic Party, One of the Parties that Sued over the Restrictive Voting Laws, along with Native American and Youth Voting Rights Groups, called the Ruling a “tremendous victory for democracy, Native voters, and young people across the state of Montana”.

“While Republican politicians continue to attack voting rights and our protected freedoms, their voter suppression efforts failed and were struck down as unconstitutional,” the Executive Director, Sheila Hogan, said in a Statement. “We’re going to keep working to make sure every eligible Montana voter can make their voices heard at the ballot box this November.”

The Chief Justice, Mike McGrath, who wrote the Opinion, pointed to the Laws’ potential to Disenfranchise Young and Indigenous Voters in Montana, who are Disproportionately affected by Efforts to Eliminate Same-Day Voter Registration, and Third-Party Ballot Collection, and Strict ID Requirements.

The Montana Constitution, McGrath wrote, affords Greater Voting Protections than the U.S. Constitution.

Writing in Election Law Blog, the University of Kentucky Election Law Professor Joshua Douglas, called the Decision “a model for how state courts should consider the protections for the right to vote within state constitutions”.

“State courts have various tools within state constitutions to robustly protect voters,” He wrote. “The Montana Supreme Court’s decision offers a solid roadmap for how to use state constitutional language on the right to vote. Other state supreme courts should follow the Montana Supreme Court’s lead.”

While Montana has Not been Won by a Democratic Presidential Candidate since 1992, and is Not expected to be Competitive in November, the State will have a High-Profile Senate Race, with Republicans trying to Flip the Seat, currently held by Senator Jon Tester (D).









NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote! Michael H. Drucker


DOD In Talks To Fund Peacekeeping Force In Gaza


Biden Administration Officials, are in Preliminary Conversations about Options for Stabilizing Post-War Gaza, including a Proposal for the Pentagon to help Fund either a Multinational Force or a Palestinian Peacekeeping Team.

The Options being considered would Not involve U.S.Troops on the Ground, according to Defense Department Officials (DOD) and other U.S. Officials.

DOD Funding would go toward the needs of the Security Force and complement Assistance from Other Countries. Aid could be used for: Reconstruction, Infrastructure, Humanitarian Assistance, and other needs.

Gaza is in Rubble, and the vast Majority of its 2.2 million People are Displaced with Strained Access to Food, Water, and Medicine.

It could be Weeks or Months before Washington and its Partners Approve any Plan, especially since Regional Players want to see a Commitment to a Two-State Solution before seriously engaging with the Options.

There are also questions about the Viability of Training a potential Palestinian-led Force, in time to maintain Order in Gaza, which has been Decimated after Five months of Brutal Fighting.

And Israel is reluctant to have these Conversations until it Defeats Hamas Militarily, and Secures the Release of Hostages being held by the Group.

Some Officials within the Israeli Government, have called for Israel to occupy Gaza after the War, a Proposal the U.S. Opposes.

“Israel is the long pole in the tent,” said One of the DOD Officials, noting that Israel “has their hands full with other things.”

“It would be one thing if the administration and the Israeli government were aligned on the way ahead, but that is just not the case,” said the Official.

The Talks include: the White House, Pentagon, State Department, and their Foreign Counterparts, about what a potential Day-After Security Force would look like, Four Officials Confirmed.

The Discussions indicate such Forces remain Serious and Viable Options for what follows Israel’s Retaliation against Hamas.

The Pentagon would likely need to shift Funds from elsewhere in the Department to Pay for the Plan.

As for a potential Palestinian-led Peacekeeping Team, it’s still unclear Who would Train and Equip its Members, which could include some of the nearly 20,000 Security Personnel backed by the Palestinian Authority, since Hamas took Control of in the Mid-2000s.

DOD began looking at Options for Supporting some kind of Multinational Force to Stabilize Gaza around the New year, when there were expectations that Israel could soon start wrapping up its Operations, according to the DOD Official.

Then in January, Secretary of State Antony Blinken urged Israel to work with Regional Countries and moderate Palestinians to Rebuild, Stabilize, and Govern Gaza, once the War ended. “This can only come through a regional approach that includes a pathway to a Palestinian state,” He said during a Visit to Israel.

Although U.S. Officials have had Conversations with Regional Partners about what the Makeup of such a Force would look like, None has Confirmed Participation because the Plan is Not Finalized, the DOD Official said. Many Countries in the Middle East, told the Biden Administration they would consider Participation Only when there was a serious Two-State Solution Plan in place.

“Even though we have had conversations on the margins with regional partners about what they’d be willing to do, contribute, accept, that has not received serious consideration from our Israeli partner,” the Official said.

Israel “is not looking to signal an end because they have not achieved the aims they are pursuing” yet in Gaza, the Official added.

In the meantime, DOD is focused on Increasing the flow of Humanitarian Aid into Gaza, including Ensuring the Security of the U.S. Military’s Plan to Build a Pier to Deliver resources by Sea to the Enclave, and urging Israel to consider “Alternatives” to a Full-Scale Rafah Invasion, the DOD Official said.

The “what comes after” talks also include the possibility of a Two-State Solution, the Official added.









NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote! Michael H. Drucker


Electionline Weekly March-28-2024


Legislative Updates

Alabama: Lawmakers are considering legislation that would require probate judges to tally the ballots after every county and statewide general election in a post-election audit. Mobile County Probate Judge Don Davis believes it’s unnecessary. He says on election day they know exactly how many ballots go to every precinct, how many ballots are cast at each voting machine from the machine’s automated counter and how many voters were processed at each precinct. “And all three of those numbers are supposed to match, and they do. And they always have,” said Davis. Rep. Debbie Woods is proposing legislation that would require probate judges to randomly select one precinct and one race that is not subject to a recount or contest and either manually tally the ballots or run them through a ballot counter not used during the election. A House committee this week discussed the legislation and Davis listened to the live stream. In 2022 legislation authorized a post-election audit pilot program in three counties.

Georgia: Lawmakers advanced a number of election changes on March 26 that would allow officials to reduce the number of voting machines, add watermarks to ballots and put pictures of all ballots online for public review. The bills are part of a Republican package of changes to how the state would conduct elections ahead of this year’s presidential race. These measures and others still need to pass final votes on the last day of this year’s legislative session March 28. State Sen. Max Burns said county election directors asked for flexibility to deploy fewer voting machines on election day to account for the high number of Georgians who cast early or absentee ballots. House Bill 1207 passed along party lines, 33-20, with all Democrats opposed. The legislation also would require election workers to be U.S. citizens, allow candidates to check ballots for accuracy before they’re printed and guarantee access to poll watchers. The Senate also passed House Bill 974, which would put a watermark on all ballots, require audits of at least two statewide races each election and post ballot images online. That bill passed 47-6.

Idaho: The House passed Senate Bill 1377 (S1377) this week after a short debate questioning the constitutionality of the bill. The bill would require any person receiving payment to gather signatures for an initiative process to disclose they are paid. This bill outlines a verbal notice and a visual badge on the petitioner’s clothing to denote their status as a paid worker. Rep. Ilana Rubel (D-Boise) was the only lawmaker to speak other than the floor sponsor Rep. Brandon Mitchell (R-Moscow). Mitchell pitched the bill as a transparency measure against out-of-state money influencing Idaho policy. “If we were so worried about transparency and voters knowing who’s paying for what, we don’t do this for any other political activity. I can spend a million dollars hiring people to knock every door in my district telling everybody that Ilana Rubel is the cat’s meow,” Rubel said. “They wouldn’t have to wear a pin or tell anybody that I’m paying them.” Rubel questioned the constitutionality of the bill; the Idaho State Supreme Court overturned a previous law to regulate the initiative process through Reclaim Idaho v. Denney (2021). The court regarded the initiative process to be a right of the people.

Maryland: A Republican nominee to the State Board of Elections will be recommended for confirmation to the full Senate despite concerns about a social media post and emails attributed to her. The Senate Executive Nominations Committee voted 12-3 to send Diane Butler, an Ellicott City resident, to the full Senate. The floor vote could come later this week. The committee held Butler’s nomination for two weeks over concerns about hyper-partisanship and her views on the integrity of recent state elections. “I think the correspondence, just to me, seems in many ways, to be incongruent to some of the motivations that were actually expressed during the hearings,” said Senate Executive Nominations Vice Chair Clarence K. Lam (D-Howard and Anne Arundel), one of three members of the panel who voted against Butler’s nomination. “I’m just not confident that her motivations previously to really press the county board of elections and some of her prior statements were solely intended to improve the process.”

Minnesota: Joe Champion (D-Minneapolis) is the lead author of the Minnesota Voting Rights Act, which would restore the right of private action for efforts by governmental entities to suppress the votes of protected classes, or dilute their votes through gerrymandering of political boundaries. “This bill would ensure that Minnesota voters once again have the challenge discrimination that they experience. We believe that voting is a part of our democracy.” The bill would bar localities from taking actions that make it harder for persons of color to vote, such as closing a polling places or limiting early voting. Champion’s bill would allow citizens or interest groups to make a claim short of going to court, and then to pursue the court option if that doesn’t work. The Judiciary Committee passed the bill on a voice vote and sent it to the full Senate for consideration at a later date.

Nebraska: Nebraska lawmakers have advanced legislation that would restore voting rights to felons immediately upon completion of their sentence. Currently state law bars those with felony convictions from voting for two years after completion of their sentence, including parole. The bill, LB20, advanced through the first round of debate, would eliminate this waiting period. Nebraska is the only state that attaches an “arbitrary” waiting period before voting rights are restored after a person’s sentence is complete, Wayne said. LB20, which Wayne introduced last session, would simply do away with that “additional penalty,” he added. “At the end of the day, when you have completed your sentence – when you are done – you should be able to participate in our society fully and completely,” Wayne said. Chair of the Government, Military and Veterans Affairs Committee, Sen. Tom Brewer of Gordon, agreed. The bill advanced to a second round of debate with bipartisan support from lawmakers 34-3, with 2 present-not voting, and 10 excused-not voting.

New Hampshire: House Bill 1264 would require towns and cities to provide accessible voting systems in local elections that meet the Help America Vote Act of 2002 as well as the Americans With Disabilities Act. Those machines would need to have the capacity to accept the choices of the voter and print out a paper ballot filled in with those choices for the voter to then cast, the bill states. The bill would effectively “enable access to voting for individuals with disabilities during elections by giving them the same degree of privacy that is accorded to nondisabled voters,” a summary from the Secretary of State’s Office reads. Sponsored by Rep. Mark Paige, an Exeter Democrat, the bill creates a mandate for towns but does not explicitly state how they might meet that mandate or acquire the machines. But advocates say they envision two phases. First, the bill creates a pilot program where the Secretary of State’s Office is required to “provide” the machines to the towns for any elections between Jan. 1 and June 30 of 2025. Paige and other supporters say that would likely entail the Secretary of State’s Office sharing the machines it already has and allowing them to be programmed for local elections. Second, Paige and other lawmakers say they will work to set aside money in the state budget next year to pay for cities and towns to acquire the machines themselves. Local officials would then use a vendor to program the machines – without the involvement of the Secretary of State’s Office. The bill received a unanimous recommendation from the House Election Law Committee and passed the full House on a voice vote last week; it heads next to the Senate.

HB 1014, a bill that would bolster voter registration efforts among young people by altering public and private school curricula. While the prime sponsor Rep. Mark Paige, D-Exeter, thinks it’s a fairly straightforward bipartisan, “common sense” bill; concerns have been raised by Republican lawmakers who oppose its passage. The bill itself would not force students to register to vote, but instead requires school districts and private schools to “develop programs to inform high school students about registering to vote.” This education would also include policies to promote student voter registration, such as “collaboration with the town or city clerk and the supervisor of the checklist to conduct voter registration at high schools.” However, completion of voter registration would not be a course requirement or graded assignment for students, according to the bill. The education program would focus on “informing students of state requirements for voter registration” and “providing access to and assistance with filing registration applications.” Paige, a former teacher, wrote this bill with the hope of bolstering the existing civics curriculum at high schools by turning education into action, or at the bare minimum, remove any barriers of confusion about voter registration.

Pennsylvania: Victims of voter intimidation would have legal standing to sue people criminally convicted of interfering with polling places under a bill passed this week by the state House Judiciary Committee. Sponsored by Rep. Stephen Kinsey (D-Philadelphia), House Bill 461 would allow victims to sue for punitive damages and attorney fees. The law would apply to defendants who are convicted of violating the Pennsylvania Election Code’s provisions against voter intimidation. The passed 14-12 in a party line vote, with Republicans in opposition, and now goes to the full House for consideration. Kinsey said during a Judiciary Committee meeting that voter intimidation has been a longstanding problem, as communities of color have faced intimidation since the 19th century and remains an issue today, with extremist groups posting watchers at drop boxes in Arizona last year. Fourteen states have passed laws to protect election officials, staff and volunteers, Kinsey noted.

Republicans in the House revealed plans to try to force action on a voter ID measure by using a seldom-used parliamentary maneuver that could get the proposal on the ballot for voters to consider in November. House Republicans said at a press conference Monday that they plan to introduce a discharge resolution – a parliamentary tool that allows lawmakers to pull a bill out of committee and bypass a committee vote, in an attempt to secure a vote on House Bill 891. The measure would add a universal voter ID requirement to the state constitution – if voters ultimately approve it in a ballot referendum. Under the current House operating rules, discharge resolutions must receive signatures from 50 members – 25 signatures from the minority party and 25 signatures from the majority party – for the resolution to move forward. A discharge resolution must then receive a majority vote from members of the House for a bill to be considered.

Tennessee: Rep. Bryan Richey (R – Maryville) has introduced a bill that would create a process for Tennesseans to formally declare party affiliation ahead of elections after a lawsuit was dismissed over state laws requiring signs to be posted at polling places telling voters they needed to be “bona fide” party members. Currently, voters are not required to register with a party to vote in a primary election in Tennessee. Instead, they just need to ask for either a Republican or Democrat ballot at their polling location. HB 1616 would let voters choose an affiliation with a political party on voter registration applications. Voters would also be allowed to be designated as “unaffiliated” voters. County election commissions would then need to record voters’ party affiliations, or unaffiliated designations, as part of voters’ permanent registration records. The bill would also let qualified voters change their registration at practically any time election offices are open, except for up to 29 days before an election. The proposal could also bolster the earlier laws that required signs placed at polling locations telling voters they needed to be “bona fide” party members to vote in primary elections. Effectively, voters may need to be formally affiliated with a party to vote in primary elections or have an “unaffiliated” designation. Voters could also vote in any party’s primary election if it is the first primary they participate in after the bill goes into effect. After voting in that election, voter affiliations and designations would need to be added to their permanent record.

Wisconsin: Gov Tony Evers (D) took action on several elections-related bills last week. Evers vetoed a Republican-authored bill that would have required him to call special elections if a state constitutional office becomes vacant before that officeholder’s term expires. Evers vetoed a bill that would have reduced the area between election observers and election workers from three to eight feet to no more than three feet. Violators of the provisions under the bill could face imprisonment for up to 90 days and a fine of up to $1,000. Under a bill Evers signed into law, closing even one polling location within 30 days of an election now requires the support of the clerk and a majority of the city council, town board or village board. Public notices are also now required for those closures, and a person would have to be stationed at the closed site to inform voters of the new site under the law. Under another new law, personal identifying information of election officials is now exempt from public records requests. The law, which takes effect in 2025, also gives election officials whistleblower protections if they report election fraud or irregularities. It also creates a new felony crime of battery to an election official. That penalty would apply if the victim is an election official, election registration official or county or municipal clerk acting in an official capacity. The law also makes changes to the campaign finance system, requiring local candidates to submit their reports to the Wisconsin Ethics Commission, rather than local clerks. Evers vetoed two bills that would have overhauled how residents of nursing homes and other long-term care facilities could cast ballots, and for voters who are determined to be incompetent. Evers also vetoed a bill that would require the state nonpartisan Legislative Audit Bureau to examine the administration of each general election.

Legal Updates

Arizona: Joshua Russell of Bucyrus, Ohio was sentenced to 2 1/2 years in prison for making death threats in voicemails left for then-Secretary of State Katie Hobbs during the 2022 election season. Russell pleaded guilty in late August 2023 to a federal charge of making an interstate threat against Hobbs, a Democrat who, as secretary of state, was Arizona’s chief elections officer in 2022 and now serves as the state’s governor. U.S. District Judge Steven Logan commended Russell for undergoing substance abuse treatment and other counseling since his arrest and getting his life in order, but concluded Russell must spend time in prison, saying he has traumatized people who work in the secretary of state’s office. The judge, who read Russell’s profanity-laden threats aloud in court, said Russell had accused the victim of being a terrorist, while he was threatening her life. He rejected Russell’s characterization of his actions as immature. “None of these people deserved it,” the judge said. Russell’s case is among the cases brought by the U.S. Justice Department’s Election Threats Task Force, which focuses on threats of violence against elected officials, workers and volunteers to ensure they can oversee elections free of harassment.

Kari Lake is asking the court to quickly issue a judgment and to decide how much she will pay Maricopa County Recorder Stephen Richer in the defamation case he brought against her, according to a filing in Maricopa County Superior Court this week. Richer sued Lake — who ran for governor in 2022 and is now running for U.S. Senate — for defamation last year, alleging that Lake made defamatory allegations that he had assisted in rigging the gubernatorial election against Lake. Richer’s legal team is treating Lake’s filing, a motion for default judgment, as an admission of liability. “She has decided she cannot defend herself in this case despite continuously saying she has evidence,” said Ben Berwick, counsel at Protect Democracy, among the firms representing Richer in the lawsuit. Lake’s attorneys do not defend Lake’s claims about Richer in the filing, nor do they challenge any of Richer’s arguments about the facts. Instead, they ask the court for a quick hearing to decide damages.

Illinois: The 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals will hold oral argument on March 28 in a lawsuit challenging an Illinois statute that allows mail-in ballots to be received and counted for up to two weeks after an election as long as they are postmarked or dated on or before Election Day. Led by a GOP representative for the state’s 12th Congressional District, Michael Bost, the Republican plaintiffs allege that the state’s “extended” mail-in ballot receipt deadline effectively “expands” Election Day in violation of the U.S. Constitution and federal law, which requires states to hold Election Day on the Tuesday after the first Monday in November. Bost and his Republican co-plaintiffs — who are represented by Judicial Watch — contend that the two-week receipt deadline for mail-in ballots burdens their right to vote by allowing “illegal ballots” to “dilute the value of timely ballots cast and received on or before Election Day.” District Court Judge John Kness originally tossed out the lawsuit in July 2023, but the Republican plaintiffs appealed the dismissal to the 7th Circuit, where a three-judge panel will ultimately decide whether or not the lawsuit will move forward following this week’s oral argument. The members of the three-judge panel will not be known until oral argument commences. In his 2023 order, district court Kness acknowledged that although federal law sets a “national standard” for Election Day, “states retain significant discretion—frequently exercised—to prescribe the times, places, and manner of conducting elections” under the Elections Clause of the U.S. Constitution. Kness added that the “[p]laintiffs’ votes…are not diluted by other valid, lawfully cast votes” as a result of the challenged deadline.

Mississippi: The secretary of state’s office and two advocacy groups asked a court to dismiss a lawsuit brought by the state Republican and Libertarian parties seeking to limit the number of mail-in absentee ballots during the upcoming presidential and congressional election.The Mississippi Alliance for Retired Americans and Vet Voice Foundation, two groups who intervened in the suit, and Secretary of State Michael Watson’s office argued in separate briefings that the federal litigation should be dismissed because the political parties lack legal standing to bring the suit. “The Mississippi Statute does not harm the plaintiff individuals or political parties in any way,” Special Assistant Attorney General Rex Shannon III wrote on behalf of Watson’s office. “It does not conflict with laws that set the election day for federal offices. And it does not impair the plaintiffs’ rights to vote or to stand for office under the First and/or Fourteenth Amendments.” The statute in question is a 2020 law requiring local election workers to count mail-in absentee ballots for up to five days after the election date. The Mississippi law currently permits election workers to count mail-in votes only if the ballots were postmarked by the election date. To support the Republican Party’s argument, Mississippi GOP Chairman Frank Bordeaux wrote in a signed declaration that the statute dilutes the weight of ballots cast on Election Day and harms conservative candidates running for office. U.S. District Judge Louis Guirola Jr. ordered all of the parties to file all responses to the pending motions by April 9 and file responses to the replies by April 16.

Montana: A split Montana Supreme Court panel has upheld a block of the four recent election laws that restrict voter access, finding them unconstitutional. The judges affirmed the ruling in a consolidated case brought by groups like the Montana Democratic Party, several Native American tribes and Montana Youth Action seeking to overturn the laws. Chief Justice Mike McGrath in a 63-page ruling issued this week called the Legislature’s pushback of the voter registration deadline from Election Day to noon the day before — while blocking paid absentee ballot collectors and using a Montana university student ID as a voter identification — facially unconstitutional. McGrath found that while the U.S. Constitution contains no explicit protection of the right to vote, the courts have held that the right “is a bulwark for other basic civil and political rights.” He said that eliminating Election Day registration interferes with the fundamental right to vote and disenfranchises more than 70,000 Montanans. “This is like arguing that because absentee voting was once not allowed, it would not interfere with the electorate’s right to vote to eliminate it today — even though three-quarters of voters in Montana now utilize it to vote,” McGrath wrote. He affirmed that House Bill 530 takes away the only option to vote for many Native Americans living on reservations. Richie Melby, representing Montana’s secretary of state, called the majority opinion a result of “faulty constitutional analysis.” “The court’s result-driven approach to judicial activism in striking down common sense voting laws designed to be as highly acceptable and secure as possible defies constitutional norms and will inevitably stand on the wrong side of legal history,” Melby said.

New York: The New York City Council filed a notice of appeal this week to the state’s highest court in support of a 2022 law it passed granting municipal voting privileges to non-citizens with green cards or work authorizations. “Empowering New Yorkers to participate in our local democratic process can only strengthen New York City by increasing civic engagement,” council spokesperson Rendy Desamours said in a statement, adding that the legislative body finds the law consistent with the state constitution, election law and municipal home rule. The legislation was ruled unconstitutional one month ago by the Appellate Division for the Second Judicial Department in New York. It had sought to allow an estimated 800,000 eligible non-citizens to cast ballots in city elections including those for mayor and City Council. But Local Law 11 of 2022 had been challenged by a coalition of right-leaning elected officials, including Staten Island Republicans Vito Fossella, Joe Borelli and Nicole Malliotakis. They argue the right to vote is sacred to U.S. citizens and the legislation is unconstitutional. Mayor Eric Adams’ administration had been defending the law and appealed a lower court’s ruling against it, but representatives did not immediately respond to questions Monday on whether its attorneys would appeal to the New York State Court of Appeals.

Onondaga County filed a lawsuit against the state over the new law that will move many local elections to line up with state and federal elections in even-numbered years. The county legislature has made clear over the last few months its intention to challenge the new law, arguing it conflicts with the county’s charter. Twenty New York counties are chartered, meaning they have a locally drafted and approved laws outlining the structure and authority of county government. The law moves several local elections outside of New York City to even-numbered years, with the exception of some city or village elections, and races for county clerk, sheriff, district attorneys, local judges and others protected in the state Constitution. The state Legislature passed the legislation in June and Gov. Kathy Hochul signed it into law in December. Transitioning elections is scheduled to start in 2025. Advocates argue the change will boost voter turnout in local elections. They also say the state law includes language to supersede any county charter laws. Opponents have also voiced concern with local issues getting overshadowed by races at the top of the ballot.

The town of Newburgh is facing a new lawsuit accusing the town’s at-large voting system of violating New York’s Voting Rights Act. Newburgh is the second municipality in the Hudson Valley to be sued under the 2022 law designed to prevent racial voter suppression and discrimination. The same law firm, Abrams Fensterman, LLP, sued the town of Mount Pleasant in Westchester County back in January for similar accusations of violating the state Voting Rights Act. A group of six town residents, three who are Black and three Hispanic, claims the current method for electing the four council seats prevents Black and Hispanic residents from electing their candidates of choice. According to the lawsuit, a quarter of the town is Black and another 15% is Hispanic but the residents claim every person ever elected to the town board has been white. They added the last time a person of color ran for a town board seat was in 2011.

Pennsylvania: Mail-in ballots that are not dated on the outside envelope by the voter should not be counted even if they arrive at a county election office on time, a three-judge appeals court panel ruled this week. The 2-1 decision from the U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals strikes down a lower court ruling and sets up a potential Supreme Court battle over Pennsylvania’s mail-ballots that began in 2020, and will almost certainly affect how the swing state’s ballots are handled in the upcoming presidential election. At issue is the materiality provision of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits officials from denying anyone from voting because of an error or omission “on any record or paper relating to any application, registration, or other act requisite to voting,” unless it is material to the person’s qualification to vote. “Because the date decision is irrelevant to whether a vote is received timely, the blink response is to believe a voter’s failure to date a return envelope should not cause his ballot to be disqualified,” Senior U.S. Circuit Judge Thomas Ambro wrote in the decision Wednesday. But the provision only applies when the state is determining who may vote, Ambro added, “and does not apply to rules, like the date requirement, that govern how a qualified voter must cast his ballot for it to be counted.” Ambro noted that the date requirement “serves little apparent purpose,” but since the state’s Supreme Court ruled that dating of envelopes was mandatory, “undated or misdated ballots are invalid under state law and must be set aside.” Pennsylvania redesigned its mail in ballots for this year. Circuit Judge Patty Shwartz wrote in a dissenting opinion Wednesday that the ruling was a reminder to voters to carefully review all instructions. “If they do not, they risk having their otherwise valid votes discounted based on even the most inconsequential mistake,” Shwartz wrote. “One can only hope that election officials do not capitalize on the Majority’s narrow interpretation of the Materiality Provision by enacting unduly technical and immaterial post-registration paperwork requirements that could silence the voices of qualified voters.”

U.S. District Judge Jennifer P. Wilson has dismissed a lawsuit by two dozen conservative state lawmakers that claimed ballot access initiatives by President Joe Biden and Gov. Josh Shapiro usurped the state Legislature’s authority to direct federal elections in the commonwealth. Wilson’s one-page order grants motions by state and federal officials to dismiss the case. The order also denies a request by two dozen conservative lawmakers for a preliminary injunction to block the ballot access initiatives, including Shapiro’s executive order implementing automatic voter registration for driver’s license applicants. In a statement, Shapiro said automatic voter registration is safe, secure, efficient, and entirely within his administration’s authority. Shapiro said that in 2020, when he was attorney general, he defeated Donald Trump and “his conspiracy theorist allies” in court to defend Pennsylvania residents’ votes and access to the ballot box.

Vermont: A lawsuit alleging voter fraud in a controversial vote to close Windham Elementary School in 2021 has been dismissed. “A court cannot grant relief in an election contest unless there were errors committed in the conduct of the election ‘sufficient to change the ultimate result,’ there was fraud in the electoral process ‘sufficient to change the ultimate result,’ or for another reason, ‘the result of the election’ was compromised,” Judge Dickson Corbett wrote in a decision issued March 11, citing Vermont law. In a ballot vote in September 2021, Windham residents voted to close the elementary school and pay tuition for pre-K-6 education to other schools. Afterwards, a successful petition led to a new vote on the question in November 2021. In a 142-139 vote, the article was rejected and the school stayed open. Two Windham residents filed a lawsuit against the town and three voters in December 2021, alleging that the three people participated in the vote even though they were not residents of the town. However, Corbett wrote, “even if these three votes were set aside, the result of the public question would be the same: there would be 139 votes cast in favor of the article, and 139 votes cast against the article. As a result, the article would not have received ‘a majority of the votes . . . in favor of the proposition,’ and so the article would not be approved, and the result of the public question would be the same: that the school should not be closed.” “The Town is pleased with the decision as it confirmed what the Town has been arguing throughout the matter,” Town Attorney Bob Fisher said Thursday in an email response to the Reformer. In a statement, Crystal Corriveau said she and fellow plaintiff Erin Kehoe do not agree with the court’s decision. Corriveau said the point raised in a motion for dismissal was denied in the Windham County court before the case was moved to Windsor County.









NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote! Michael H. Drucker