Recent news
Here are the changes made to election dates and rules since our last edition, including legal decisions, executive actions, and legislation.
Roundup
- Ohio: On Oct. 9, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit blocked a district court's order directing Secretary of State Frank LaRose (R) to allow counties to install absentee/mail-in ballot drop boxes at locations other than election board offices. As a result, LaRose's initial order limiting drop boxes to one site per county remains in force.
The panel voted 2-1, with Judges Richard Griffin and Amul Thapar forming the majority. Griffin wrote, "Federal courts are not 'overseers and micromanagers' of 'the minutiae of state election processes.' The district court in this case altered election rules during an election and in disregard for Ohio's important state interests." Griffin and Thapar were appointed by Presidents George W. Bush (R) and Donald Trump (R), respectively.
Judge Helene White dissented: "[To] hold that the constitutionality of a last-minute order by a single state official impacting the voting rights of thousands of citizens may not be adjudicated until after their right to vote has been disrupted applies Supreme Court precedent to an inappropriate context." White, like Griffin, is a George W. Bush appointee.
- Texas: On Oct. 9, Judge Robert Pitman of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas blocked Gov. Greg Abbott's (R) directive restricting the number of absentee/mail-in ballot return locations to one per county. However, On Oct. 10, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit overruled Pitman's order, allowing Abbott's Oct. 1 directive to remain in force.
In his Oct. 9 order, Pitman wrote, "With no evidence that ballot return centers have jeopardized election integrity in the past, no evidence that they may threaten election integrity in the November Election, the State’s admission that multiple ballot return centers can be open on Election Day, and faced with assertions by the County Clerks that their ballot return centers operate in the same manner as central ballot return centers, the State has not shown that its regulatory interest in smooth election administration is 'important,' much less 'sufficiently weighty' to justify the burden it has placed on absentee voters in Texas." Pitman is a President Barack Obama (D) appointee.
On Oct. 10, Attorney General Ken Paxton (R) filed an emergency motion for a stay to block Pitman's order from taking effect. Paxton said, "The district court's order undermines our election security, disrupts the democratic process, and will only lead to voter confusion. It cannot stand. Mail-in ballots are particularly vulnerable to fraud. Protections that ensure their security must be upheld and my office will continue to fight for safe, free and fair elections."
On the 10th, the Fifth Circuit panel granted Paxton's motion, reinstating Abbott's original order. The panel included Judges Don Willett, James C. Ho, and Stuart Kyle Duncan, all of whom are Donald Trump (R) appointees.
Lawsuits
To date, we have tracked 294 lawsuits and/or court orders involving election policy issues and the COVID-19 outbreak. Click here to view the complete list of lawsuits and court orders.
Here's the latest on noteworthy litigation. Examples of noteworthy litigation include lawsuits filed by presidential campaigns and major political parties, and cases decided by state supreme courts.
- Minnesota: On Oct. 11, Judge Nancy E. Brase of the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota rejected state Republicans' request to block a court settlement extending the receipt deadline for absentee/mail-in ballots to Nov. 10. As a result, the receipt deadline remains Nov. 10.
On Aug. 3, a state district court approved a consent decree between the plaintiffs and the state defendants in LaRose v. Simon. Under the terms of the settlement, the state agreed to count all absentee/mail-in ballots postmarked on or before Nov. 3 and received by Nov. 10.
James Caron and Eric Lucero, two certified presidential elector nominees for the Republican Party, sued the state in U.S. district court, alleging the consent decree was unconstitutional. They asked the court for an injunction to bar enforcement of the deadline extension. Brasel declined to do so, finding that Carson and Lucero lacked standing to contest the settlement. Brasel is a Trump appointee.
- Missouri: On Oct. 9, Judge Brian C. Wimes of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri issued an order requiring election authorities to accept mail-in ballots returned in person. However, on Oct. 10, Wimes suspended his own order pending appeal, leaving the requirement that mail-in ballots be returned by mail in place.
On June 4, Gov. Mike Parson (R) signed SB631 into law, permitting any registered voter to vote by mail in any 2020 election, subject to a notarization requirement. The law requires mail-in ballots be returned by mail. In Missouri, mail-in ballots are distinct from absentee ballots, which are available only to voters meeting specific eligibility criteria and are subject to different return requirements.
In his ruling, Wimes wrote, "[Considered] alone, requiring a remote voter to put a ballot in a mailbox does not sound like a particularly arduous or severe burden. However, Defendants have presented no reasonable justification for different treatment of remote voters. On this basis, because the right to vote is at issue and the risk is total disenfranchisement even if the voter does everything right, and because the Defendants already have a scheme in place to accommodate remote ballots, the Court finds Plaintiffs likely to succeed on the merits of Count I as it relates to the manner in which remote ballots can be returned to the election authority." Wimes is an Obama appointee.
In a statement, Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft (R) said, "I am disappointed a federal judge decided to legislate from the bench and overturn the will of the people, through their elected representatives, to have safe and secure elections. I have requested the Attorney General's office to immediately appeal the decision and request a stay."
Also on Oct. 9, the Missouri Supreme Court upheld the state's notarization requirement for mail-in ballots, affirming a lower court's ruling to that effect. In an unsigned opinion, the unanimous court said: "Although Appellants allege that the notarization requirement infringes on the fundamental right to vote, this Court has found that there is no constitutional right in Missouri to vote by absentee or mail-in ballot. … The new absentee and mail-in ballot statutes do not affect the right of voters to go to the polls to vote."
- Pennsylvania: On Oct. 10, Judge J. Nicholas Ranjan of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania dismissed a lawsuit over three of Pennsylvania's voting procedures.
The plaintiffs – including Donald J. Trump for President, Inc. and the Republican National Committee – argue that the following voting provisions are unconstitutional:
- the use of drop boxes for returning mail-in ballots;
- the requirement that local officials not reject mail-in ballots on the basis of perceived signature mismatch;
- and the requirement that poll watchers be residents of the counties to which they are assigned.
Ranjan ruled in favor of the state defendants, finding that the plaintiffs lacked standing to pursue their claims. Ranjan also ruled that the plaintiffs' claims would fail on the merits: "[The] Court finds that the election regulations put in place by the General Assembly and implemented by Defendants do not significantly burden any right to vote. They are rational. They further important state interests. They align with the Commonwealth’s elaborate election-security measures. They do not run afoul of the United States Constitution. They will not otherwise be second-guessed by this Court." Ranjan is a Trump appointee.
Matthew Morgan, general counsel for the Trump campaign, said, "We’ve continued the fight against the Democrats’ completely unmonitored, unsecure drop boxes in the federal courts. Clearly, we disagree with the Western District’s decision on unsecure drop boxes, and President Trump’s team will immediately file an appeal."
Today: Mail-in ballot rejection by state, 2016-2018
The Help Desk daily feature will answer one frequently asked question or provide a summary of key election dates and policies each day. Today we take a look at mail-in ballot rejection rates by state from 2016-2018.
Election officials rejected 420,000 of the absentee/mail-in ballots voters returned in the 2018 elections. This represented 1.4% of the 30 million absentee/mail-in ballots cast. Officials rejected 320,000 (1.0%) of the 33 million absentee/mail-in ballots returned in 2016.
In terms of turnout, rejected absentee/mail-in ballots were 0.2% of the 140 million votes cast in 2016 and 0.4% of the 120 million cast in 2018.
In thirty-five states, a higher percentage of absentee/mail-in ballots were rejected in 2018 than in 2016. In nine states, a lower percentage were rejected. Five states had no change and one—Vermont—had incomplete data and was excluded from this comparison.
Officials may reject absentee/mail-in ballots for a number of reasons ranging from a missed deadline to the use of an incorrect return envelope. The exact criteria for an absentee/mail-in ballot's rejection is determined on a state-by-state basis.
The map below shows the average rejection rate by state from 2016 to 2018. Data come from the U.S. Election Assistance Commission's (EAC) "Election Administration and Voting Survey" report.
To read more about mail-in ballot rejection rates from 2016-2018, click here.
What we’re reading today
Upcoming dates and deadlines
Here are the key deadlines for voter registration, early voting, and absentee/mail-in voting coming up in the next seven days. For coverage of all dates, deadlines, and requirements, click here.
- Voter registration deadlines:
- October 13:
- District of Columbia (mail-in received)
- Kansas (in-person, mail-in postmarked, online)
- Louisiana (online)
- Maryland (in-person, mail-in postmarked, online)
- Minnesota (in-person, mail-in received, online)
- New Jersey (in-person, mail-in postmarked)
- Oregon (in-person, mail-in postmarked, online)
- Virginia (in-person, mail-in received, online)
- West Virginia (in-person, mail-in postmarked, online)
- October 14:
- Wisconsin (mail-in postmarked, online)
- October 16:
- Nebraska (mail-in postmarked, online)
- October 18:
- October 19:
- Alabama (in-person, mail-in received, online)
- California (mail-in postmarked, online)
- Maine (mail-in received)
- Michigan (mail-in postmarked, online)
- Pennsylvania (in-person, mail-in received, online)
- South Dakota (in-person, mail-in received)
- Wyoming (in-person, mail-in received)
- Early voting begins:
- October 13:
- October 14:
- Kansas
- Rhode Island
- Tennessee
- October 15:
- October 16:
- October 17:
- Massachusetts
- Nevada
- New Mexico
- October 19:
- Idaho
- Florida
- Alaska
- Arkansas
- Colorado
- North Dakota
- Absentee/mail-in voting request deadline:
- October 13:
- Rhode Island (in-person, mail-in received)
- Absentee/mail-in voting return deadline:
And a dose of calm
|
