Voter Fraud, Voter ID, and Legitimacy
By Christian Fong, Assistant Professor of Political Science, University of Michigan
Social scientific studies of voter fraud have found that it is rare, and so far, they have not produced evidence that it has influenced the outcome of recent American elections. From this evidence, some contend that voter fraud is not a serious problem and that voter ID laws have minimal benefits.
However, determining a winner is not the only purpose of democratic elections. Honest and fair elections also confer legitimacy upon the winner – a sense among the public that they have an obligation to obey their commands and that others have an obligation to do the same. Legitimacy is an essential ingredient to any well-functioning political authority, and so election rules should be chosen not just to ensure that the person who received the most real votes is the winner, but also so that the public views the winner as legitimate.
In my new study supported by the Grant Institute, I put this proposition to the test by running an experiment to assess how electoral fraud and voter ID laws influence the legitimacy of the winning candidate. The experiment was conducted on a representative sample of 3,000 American adults, evenly divided between Republicans and Democrats. Respondents were told about the results of an (unbeknownst to them) fictitious gubernatorial election in which a candidate from whichever party they do not support won by a commanding margin. Some respondents were also told that one of the winner’s supporters attempted to submit mail-in ballots on behalf of 14 deceased voters but was caught before the ballots were counted as votes. Others were told that after the election, there were no allegations of fraud on either side.
Even though the fraud was detected before the ballots were counted and even though the fraud was on such a small scale that it would not have affected the outcome of the election even if it had not been detected, respondents who were informed that one of the winner’s supporters attempted to commit fraud viewed the winner as significantly less legitimate. For example, they were much more tolerant of the outgoing governor refusing to provide the winner with briefings during the transition and of members of the state legislature boycotting the winner’s state of the state address.
The experiment also manipulated the state’s election rules. Some respondents were told that voters had to verify their identity with a photo ID; others were told that voters need only give their name and address.
Voter ID laws led both Republican and Democratic respondents to rate the winner as substantially more legitimate, and the boost in legitimacy persisted whether or not one of the winner’s supporters attempted to commit mail-in vote fraud. This suggests that the effectiveness of voter ID laws in boosting legitimacy is not predicated solely on actually preventing voter fraud. Rather, voters of both parties view them as an essential ingredient of honest and fair elections.
Professor Fong’s article is available here.
The views expressed by the author are his own and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Ulysses S. Grant Institute.
Arizona
The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors voted 4-1 to approve vote center and drop box locations for upcoming elections. The vote occurred after Recorder Justin Heap’s attorney sent a letter to the Board stating that only the Recorder has statutory authority to set up drop box locations, and that anyone who assists in creating or administering drop boxes established via other means may be guilty of a class five felony for misrepresentation as an election official or official ballot repository. The controversy occurs amidst ongoing litigation between the Board and Recorder regarding the division of election duties between the two offices. Both the Board and the Recorder have accused one another of political gamesmanship regarding the matter.
California
Federal prosecutors charged Brenda Lee Brown Armstrong, a 64-year-old Marina del Rey resident and longtime paid petition circulator, with one felony count of paying another person to register to vote. According to the plea agreement, Armstrong paid homeless individuals in Los Angeles’s Skid Row to sign her ballot-initiative petitions and complete voter registration forms. When signers had no fixed address, Armstrong listed her own former Los Angeles address on the forms, which under California’s universal vote-by-mail system would route ballots in their names to her residence. Armstrong agreed to plead guilty; the charge carries a maximum five-year federal prison term.
The Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors approved a motion committing the county to provide legal defense for election employees who face federal criminal charges arising from the good-faith performance of their official duties. The measure also authorizes County Counsel and the Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk to initiate or join litigation, including amicus filings, in response to any “federal interference” with the June 2 primary or November general election.
Colorado
Governor Jared Polis commuted the sentence of former Mesa County Clerk Tina Peters, who was convicted in 2024 of permitting unauthorized access to county voting equipment during a 2021 software update, cutting her nine-year term to roughly four years and ordering her release on parole June 1. The state Democratic Party voted to censure Polis over the commutation, barring him from participating in party events and saying the decision did not reflect the party’s commitments; Secretary of State Griswold and the bipartisan Colorado County Clerks Association also opposed it. A state appeals court had found the prior month that Peters’ sentence was improper and directed that she be resentenced.
Connecticut
Governor Ned Lamont signed a bill authorizing no-excuse absentee ballots. The bill allows all eligible voters the option of using absentee ballots for elections. The law also increases penalties for harassment of election workers, tampering with absentee ballot drop boxes, and restricts federal law enforcement officials from being within 250 feet of a polling or election site without state permission or a court order.
Georgia
The Department of Justice is seeking the names and addresses of election workers who participated in the 2020 election in Fulton County. The Justice Department told a federal judge it intends to pursue grand jury subpoenas to interview election workers and determine whether further criminal investigation is warranted. Attorneys for Fulton County contested the request, arguing it was overly broad and may reopen events past the applicable charging period.
Indiana
Two Republican state Senate primaries are headed to recounts on margins of a handful of votes. In District 23, Paula Copenhaver trailed incumbent Spencer Deery by three votes and filed a recount petition challenging ballots cast by more than a dozen voters who said on social media they had “crossed over” to vote in the Republican primary, along with a motion to subpoena those voters to testify before the Indiana Recount Commission. Indiana law bars voting in a primary for a party a voter does not intend to affiliate with but provides no post-election enforcement mechanism. In District 15, Darren Vogt filed for a recount trailing incumbent Liz Brown by 15 votes, partly citing Allen County ballot-counting glitches. On Tuesday, the Indiana Recount Commission appointed attorney Evan Norris as the recount director to oversee the review of ballots during the primary.
Iowa
The U.S. Attorney has recommended that Ian Andre Roberts, an illegal immigrant who had registered to vote in Maryland, and later served in numerous education positions including as the Des Moines school superintendent, should serve the maximum 37 months for unlawful firearms possession charges and falsely claiming to be a U.S. citizen.
Louisiana
Two local candidates in Kenner are suing the state alleging that the recount process is unconstitutional. The candidates allege that issues regarding voting machines and the issuance of federal provisional ballots for state races impacted the final results of the elections. The candidates are seeking new elections and an order requiring all future elections to use ballots that are publicly counted and preserved. State law does not provide for automatic recounts, and only absentee ballots are recounted.
Maryland
The State Board of Elections (SBE) announced it would re-send all 565,000 mail-in ballots issued so far for the June 23 gubernatorial primary after a vendor error caused a portion of voters to receive a ballot for the wrong party and was unable to determine which of these voters received the wrong ballot. Production of replacement ballots began the week of the announcement, and the state began mailing out the corrected ballots on May 22. The mailing is projected to be completed by May 29.
Following a request from President Trump to open an investigation into Maryland’s mail-in ballot issue, the DOJ’s Civil Rights division issued a request for the preservation of records and information as part of a Help America Vote Act (HAVA) audit. House Administration Chairman Bryan Steil followed with a letter to State Administrator Jared DeMarinis pressing for answers on pre-distribution auditing and vendor oversight.
Maryland Senate President Bill Ferguson expressed potential openness to redistricting of the state congressional maps. Ferguson had previously expressed concerns about redistricting, citing legal concerns and public backlash. Ferguson stated that the “rules have changed” and that Maryland may need to respond to the changing situation. These comments follow the Supreme Court ruling in Louisiana v. Callais and open the door for Maryland to call a special session for redistricting.
Massachusetts
Federal prosecutors charged Sunny Manhertz, a Canadian citizen and lawful permanent resident of Saugus, with one count of unlawful voting by an alien and one count of casting a materially false or fraudulent ballot under state law. According to the charging documents, Manhertz became a permanent resident in 1987, attested on a 2016 Massachusetts voter registration form under penalty of perjury that he was a U.S. citizen, and voted in the 2012, 2016, 2020, and 2024 federal elections. In a May 11 interview, he allegedly confirmed signing the form and told investigators he had been voting since 2008. The false-ballot count carries up to five years in prison; the unlawful-voting count up to one year.
Mississippi
State senators stated that the redistricting process has not reached the stage of creating new maps. The senators said that the process for map creation will be driven by the data regarding shifts in population, that they do not anticipate a sweeping overhaul, and that the process is expected to take time.
Nevada
Secretary of State Aguilar stated the state must “accept” a ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court that could prohibit the return of mail ballots after Election Day. Nevada allows ballots to be returned for up to four days after Election Day.
New Hampshire
Governor Ayotte signed a law moving the state’s primary date from September to June beginning in 2028. The bill passed with bipartisan support in the legislature. The bill also shifts the candidate registration window back to March to accommodate the new primary date.
North Carolina
The North Carolina Modernization of Election Data Systems Advisory Commission (MEDS) issued a resolution to the state General Assembly requesting funding to replace the Statewide Elections Information Management System (SEIMS) and sustained funding for the new system. The MEDS commission was established and chaired by the State Auditor to guide the modernization of the state’s election data infrastructure, including the replacement of SEIMS.
Ohio
Republican lawmakers in both houses of the Ohio legislature issued joint resolutions seeking to enshrine the state’s voter photo ID laws into the state constitution. The resolutions would require approval by a three-fifths vote in both chambers to be placed on the November general election ballot. State laws currently require photo ID for voting which the resolution authors seek to make a constitutionally protected provision.
South Carolina
The General Assembly passed four election measures before adjourning its 2026 session. It ratified S 582, completing approval of a constitutional amendment, which voters backed 86 percent to 14 percent in 2024, providing that only United States citizens may vote in state or local elections. Governor McMaster signed H 3556, restricting odd-year municipal election dates and limiting election commissions to municipalities over 10,000 residents; H 3557, moving the candidate filing deadline earlier and adding a primary filing fee; and S 866, requiring a referendum before a municipal sales-and-use tax may take effect.
The state Senate declined to advance a new congressional map when a motion to end debate failed, halting a White House-backed mid-decade redistricting push before the June primary. The state House had approved new congressional lines earlier in the month following the Louisiana v. Callais ruling, and the plan could have given Republicans control of all seven of the state’s congressional seats. The Senate could take the matter up again next session.
Wyoming
On May 22, the Secretary of State presented a number of legislative proposals to the Joint Corporations Committee regarding election integrity. These proposals include measures such as pen and paper ballots, banning drop boxes and ballot harvesting, hand-counting, and stronger voter ID measures. The Joint Committee approved the measures as draft bills for the 2026 Interim Session.
Georgia
Numbered List of Voters
Hearing: June 3, 2026
Comment Deadline: Noon on June 2, 2026
The State Election Board proposed amendments to its definitions and election-conduct rules(Ga. Comp. R. & Regs. 183-1-12-.02, 183-1-12-.11(2)(a)) requiring that a numbered list of voters be maintained in paper form as part of the official election record. The Board’s stated concern is that the spread of electronic poll books and digital counters has displaced the paper numbered list, leaving no auditable paper document of voters in order of voting. The amendments define “numbered list of voters” consistent with O.C.G.A. § 21-2-2(16) and specify that each voter’s name be recorded in ink and in sequential order at check-in. The Board cited its rulemaking authority under O.C.G.A. § 21-2-31. A vote on adoption is to follow the hearing.
Prohibition of Charges for Voter Registration Challenges
Hearing: June 3, 2026
Comment Deadline: Noon on June 2, 2026
The State Election Board proposed a new rule (Ga. Comp. R. & Regs. 183-1-6-.07) barring county boards of registration and elections, boards of registrars, and other hearing officers from charging challengers for the costs of processing voter registration challenges, including administrative labor, mailing, printing, and materials. The rule also provides that a challenger submitting hard-copy documentation need furnish only a single copy, with any additional copies for board or staff use produced by the receiving entity. The Board cited its authority under O.C.G.A. §§ 21-2-31 and 21-2-220 et seq. and tied the rule to the challenge provisions of O.C.G.A. §§ 21-2-229 and 21-2-230. A vote on adoption is to follow the hearing.
North Carolina
Absentee Ballot Deficiencies
Hearing: June 22, 2026
Comment deadline: July 14, 2026
The State Board of Elections proposed a set of absentee voting rules (08 NCAC 18 .0201, .0501–.0505) governing how county boards proceed when a deficiency in a returned absentee ballot is identified. The rules define curable deficiencies (which trigger a voter-contact and cure process) and non-curable deficiencies (which result in the ballot being cancelled and reissued if time permits), and distinguish irregularities that require further action from those that must only be documented.
Photo Identification
Hearing: June 9, 2026
Comment deadline: July 14, 2026
The State Board proposed amendments to its photo identification rules (08 NCAC 17 .0101, .0109) for in-person and absentee-by-mail voting. The amendments align rule deadlines with statutory deadlines and require that a county board’s decision on an exception affidavit be made by majority vote.
Recounts Hearing: June 8, 2026
Comment deadline: July 14, 2026
The State Board proposed amendments to three recount rules (08 NCAC 09 .0106, .0107, .0110) refining the conduct of discretionary and mandatory recounts, including how bipartisan recount teams are chosen, how tabulator-rejected ballots are handled, and the deadline for beginning a hand-to-eye secondary recount.
Voting Site Conduct
Hearing: June 29, 2026
Comment deadline: July 14, 2026
The State Board proposed a series of new voting site rules (08 NCAC 10C .0101–.0104) governing how county boards establish buffer zones, electioneering zones, and curbside voting areas, and how officials maintain order at voting sites.
Voter List Maintenance on Non-Citizenship Basis Rules Review
Commission vote: May 28, 2026
The State Board adopted a new chapter of list maintenance rules addressing removal of registrants on the basis of non-citizenship, incorporating revisions made in response to public comment. The rules are now before the Rules Review Commission for final approval at its May 28 meeting.
The John Locke Foundation also offered a summary of the proposed recount and voter ID rulemakings.
Virginia
Ranked Choice Voting Batch Elimination Amendments
Comment Period Opens: June 1, 2026
Comment Period Closes: July 1, 2026
The final text of an amendment to VAC 20-100 regarding the use of batch elimination in rank choice voting has been approved for publication in the Virginia Register of Regulations. The changes define batch elimination and provide for when it can be used in eliminating candidates for elections using ranked choice voting.
Personal Use of Campaign Funds
Comment Period Closes: June 3, 2026
The State Board proposed an amendment to VAC 20-90 governing the use of campaign funds. The amendment overhauls VAC 20-90-50 & 20-90-60. It provides definitions, examples, and regulations for what constitutes personal use of campaign funds, where the Board has case-by-case discretion as to whether a use constitutes personal use, which non-campaign uses are permissible, violations, and issuance of advisory opinions.
Proposed Changes for Citizenship Verification
The State Board has recommended changes to VAC 20-40. Included in the recommendations is a requirement for rulemaking regarding the use of DHS’s Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) program for citizenship verification for voter registration. The proposed amendment is required for compliance with § 24.2-404(E) of the Code of Virginia. The Board of Elections has not yet released language for the proposed rule.
Alabama
Alabama State Conference of the NAACP v. Allen, No. 2:21-cv-1531 (N.D. Ala.)
On May 18, a federal court denied the state’s emergency motion to vacate the court-ordered state Senate map in light of Louisiana v. Callais, on the ground that the pending Eleventh Circuit appeal divested the district court of jurisdiction. The 2026 state Senate primary proceeded under the remedial map.
Singleton v. Allen, No. 2:21-cv-1291 (N.D. Ala.); Allen v. Milligan, No. 2:21-cv-1530 (N.D. Ala.)
On May 26, a three-judge federal court panel granted a preliminary injunction barring Alabama from using its 2023 congressional map in the 2026 elections, ruling after a May 22 hearing that the map remained intentionally discriminatory against black voters in violation of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act and the Fourteenth Amendment. The ruling came after the U.S. Supreme Court, citing Louisiana v. Callais, had set aside the panel’s earlier May 11 decision and remanded for reconsideration. The court ordered the state to continue using the court-drawn map under which the 2024 elections were held, and the state appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. DOJ has also filed a brief in support of Alabama.
Arizona
State ex rel. Mayes v. Marshall, No. CV2026-006712 (Maricopa Cnty. Super. Ct.)
On May 14, the Arizona Attorney General filed a quo warranto action seeking the ouster of Navajo County Recorder David Marshall on the ground that the Arizona Constitution prohibits a state legislator from holding any other public office during his elected term. Marshall resigned from the Arizona House in April before being sworn in as recorder; his House term runs through January 2027.
California
Wagner v. Weber, No. 8:26-cv-01263 (C.D. Cal.)
On May 20, a California Secretary of State candidate and the American Independent Party of California filed suit against Secretary of State Weber, alleging the state failed to make a reasonable effort to cancel the registrations of voters who have become ineligible through a change of residence, in violation of Section 8 of the National Voter Registration Act. The plaintiffs ask the court to find Weber in violation and to compel a list-maintenance program.
United States v. Weber, No. 2:25-cv-09149 (C.D. Cal.)
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit heard oral arguments on May 19 regarding the DOJ’s appeal of a dismissal of their request for the unredacted voter registration lists from the state of California.
Delaware
Americans for Prosperity Foundation v. Albence, No. 1:26-cv-00445 (D. Del.)
Americans for Prosperity and the Americans for Prosperity Foundation sued state election officials in federal court, challenging the state’s 2012 campaign-finance disclosure law. The groups, which produce “third-party advertising” naming candidates without coordinating with campaigns, contend the law’s requirement that they register as a political committee and disclose donors who have given more than $100 violates the First Amendment rights to free speech and private association. They seek to have the law declared unconstitutional and to enjoin its enforcement, arguing donors would withhold contributions for fear of harassment.
American Civil Liberties Union v. Town of Fenwick Island, No. S25C-12-003 (Del. Super. Ct.)
On May 26, a state court granted a motion to dismiss in an ACLU challenge to a town charter allowing corporations to vote in local elections. In the motion, the judge found that the state explicitly recognized corporations as people and that the principle of “one person one vote” included non-natural persons. The court dismissed the claim that by allowing corporations to vote towns and municipalities were engaged in vote dilution and violating the free and equal election provision of the state constitution.
District of Columbia
DSCC v. Trump, No. 1:26-cv-1114 (D.D.C.)
On May 14, a federal court weighed plaintiffs’ motion to preliminarily block implementation of the executive order directing creation of a verified-voter list, questioning at a two-and-a-half-hour hearing whether the challenge was ripe before any voter had been removed. DOJ counsel argued the collected state data would not be the federal government’s responsibility if a state misused it; plaintiffs argued federal privacy law bars the cross-referenced national database the order contemplates.
Florida
Equal Ground Education Fund v. Byrd, No. 2026 CA 000914 (Fla. Cir. Ct., Leon Cnty.); Common Cause v. DeSantis, No. 2026 CA 000928 (Fla. Cir. Ct., Leon Cnty.); Thompson-Wynn v. Byrd, No. 2026 CA 000925 (Fla. Cir. Ct., Leon Cnty.) (consolidated)
On May 26, a state court denied a preliminary injunction against Florida’s new congressional map, allowing the state to use the Republican-drawn plan while three consolidated lawsuits continue. The court found that the plaintiffs had not shown a substantial likelihood of success, characterizing the mapmaker’s use of partisan data as circumstantial rather than direct evidence of unlawful intent, and held that reverting to the 2022 map on a rushed record so close to the primary would be improper. The plaintiffs filed notices of appeal; the litigation is expected to reach the Florida Supreme Court.
Georgia
Dolezal v. Raffensperger, No. 26CV007174 (Fulton Cnty. Super. Ct.)
On May 18, a Georgia lieutenant governor candidate filed an emergency petition in state court seeking a temporary restraining order and writ of mandamus to compel Secretary of State Raffensperger to admit State Election Board members and bipartisan poll watchers to the Election Night Reporting Room during the May 19 primary, citing Raffensperger’s own gubernatorial candidacy as a conflict of interest. On May 19, the court granted an ex parte temporary restraining order permitting access, and then hours later voided the order on procedural grounds, finding that the petitioners had not complied with Georgia’s notice requirements. The next hearing is scheduled for May 28.
Louisiana
Bernard v. Landry, No. 3:26-cv-00487 (M.D. La.)
On May 18, the League of Women Voters of Louisiana, the LWV of Louisiana Education Fund, and individual voters voluntarily dismissed their federal challenge to Governor Landry’s executive order suspending the state’s May 16 congressional primary following Louisiana v. Callais. The court granted the dismissal the same day.
Maine
United States v. Bellows, No. 1:25-cv-00468 (D. Me.)
On May 21, a federal court dismissed the DOJ’s suit seeking to compel the state to produce unredacted statewide voter file.
Mississippi
State Board of Election Commissioners v. Mississippi State Conference of the NAACP, No. 24-1183 (U.S.)
On May 18, the U.S. Supreme Court vacated and remanded the Fifth Circuit’s judgment for reconsideration in light of Louisiana v. Callais. The remedial legislative maps used in the November 2025 special elections remain in place pending further proceedings.
Missouri
von Glahn v. Hoskins, No. 26AC-CC00248 (Cole Cnty. Cir. Ct.)
On May 18, People Not Politicians filed suit against Secretary of State Hoskins and Attorney General Hanaway seeking to compel Hoskins to rule on the sufficiency of referendum petitions challenging the new congressional map. Hoskins has stated his review will not begin until late July, with a determination by August 4, the same day as the primary under the new map. The Missouri Supreme Court ruled the previous week that bare submission of the petitions does not automatically suspend the map.
NAACP v. Kehoe, No. SC101541 (MO Supreme Court)
On May 27, the Missouri Supreme Court rejected an appeal from a lower court ruling that found Governor Kehoe had the constitutional authority to call an extraordinary session of the General Assembly to establish new congressional districts.
New Hampshire
United States v. Scanlan, No. 1:25-cv-00371 (D.N.H.)
On May 26, a federal court heard arguments between the Department of Justice and the New Hampshire Secretary of State regarding the disclosure of unredacted voter list information. The government contends the information is needed to ensure accurate maintenance of voter rolls and compliance with federal law, while New Hampshire claims the request is outside the purview of federal oversight and would disclose sensitive information protected by law.
North Carolina
Kivett v. North Carolina State Board of Elections, No. 24CV031557-910 (N.C. Super. Ct., Wake Cnty.)
On May 26, a state court granted summary judgment to the plaintiffs, holding that the state’s practice of permitting “never residents” (individuals who have never resided in North Carolina) to vote in state elections violates the North Carolina Constitution. The Republican National Committee, North Carolina Republican Party, and Restoring Integrity and Trust in Elections (RITE) supporting individual voters brought the suit.
North Carolina Republican Party v. North Carolina State Board of Elections, No. 24CV026820-910 (N. C. Super. Ct., Wake Cnty.)
On May 20, a state court entered a consent judgment resolving the Republican National Committee and North Carolina Republican Party’s suit against the State Board of Elections over the removal of noncitizens from the voter rolls. The suit concerned enforcement of Section 44 of Session Law 2023-140, which requires county court clerks to report jury-duty citizenship excusals to the board for use in roll maintenance. The parties’ agreed resolution dismisses the case without prejudice.
Bard v. North Carolina State Board of Elections, No. 24-CVS-3534 (N.C. Super. Ct., Wake Cnty.)
On May 20, the North Carolina Court of Appeals affirmed a trial court’s dismissal of a challenge to the state’s 2023 congressional, state House, and state Senate maps. The plaintiffs had argued that the North Carolina Constitution’s guarantee of “free” elections implies an unenumerated right to “fair” elections that the Republican-drawn maps violated through partisan advantage. The trial court dismissed the suit in 2024; the appellate court affirmed in a unanimous decision.
North Dakota
Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians v. Howe, No. 24-1199 (U.S.)
On May 18, the U.S. Supreme Court vacated and remanded the Eighth Circuit’s judgment for reconsideration in light of Louisiana v. Callais. The Eighth Circuit had held that Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act may be enforced only by the federal government, not private parties.
Oregon
United States v. Oregon, No. 6:25-cv-01666 (D. Ore.)
On May 19, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit heard oral argument in the DOJ’s appeal of the dismissal of its suit seeking unredacted voter registration records from the state.
Tennessee
Tenn. Dem. Party v. Lee, No. 3:26-cv-00603 (M.D. Tenn.) (consolidated)
On May 14, a federal court denied the Tennessee Democratic Party’s motion for a temporary restraining order against the new congressional map and canceled a hearing previously set for May 20. On May 19, the court consolidated the three federal challenges into a single case to be heard by a three-judge panel.
Texas
Texas State Conference of the NAACP v. Abbott, No. 2021-57207 (189th Dist. Ct., Harris Cnty.)
On May 19, the Texas Court of Appeals reversed a trial court and dismissed a 2021 challenge to Senate Bill 1, the state’s omnibus election law. The plaintiffs argued that SB 1’s restrictions on early voting, its ban on drop boxes and drive-thru voting, limits on officials promoting vote-by-mail, expanded poll-watcher authority, and mail-ballot handling rules were enacted with discriminatory intent in violation of the Texas Constitution. The trial court had denied the state’s motion to dismiss in 2022.
U.S. Virgin Islands
Moorhead et al. v. Fawkes, No. 1:26-cv-00011 (D.V.I.); Moorhead v. Fawkes, No. 1:26-cv-00006 (D.V.I.)
On May 26, a federal court dismissed two cases on grounds that plaintiffs lacked standing. The cases involved claims regarding potential ballot access issues and the role of political party certification in the electoral process. A third similar lawsuit remains pending.
Vermont
Morin v. City of Burlington, No. 24-CV-02403 (Vt. Super. Ct., Chittenden Unit)
On May 15, the state Supreme Court affirmed a lower court’s dismissal of a state constitutional challenge to Burlington’s charter amendment permitting noncitizens to vote in school board elections and on the district’s annual education budget. There was one dissent. RITE supported the plaintiffs in this case.
Virginia
Scott v. McDougle, No. CL25-1582-00 (Va. Cir. Ct., Tazwell Cnty.)
On May 15, the U.S. Supreme Court denied Virginia’s emergency stay application without comment, leaving in place the Supreme Court of Virginia’s May 8 decision invalidating the April 21 referendum on a mid-decade redistricting amendment.
Wisconsin
United States v. Wisconsin Elections Commission, No. 3:25-cv-1036 (W.D. Wis.)
On May 21, a federal court dismissed the DOJ’s suit seeking to compel the Wisconsin Elections Commission to turn over the state’s complete, unredacted voter registration list. The DOJ had argued the Commission’s refusal violated Title III of the Civil Rights Act of 1960; the Commission cited state privacy law. The ruling came the same day as the parallel dismissal in Maine.
League of Women Voters of Wisconsin v. Wisconsin Election Commission, No. 2026CV001514 (Wis. Cir. Ct.)
On May 12, the League of Women Voters of Wisconsin filed suit against the state arguing that the discretionary nature of Wis. Stat.§ 6.87(9) regarding the opportunity for voters to “cure” mail-in ballots violates the due process clause of the state constitution. Current law gives municipal clerks discretion with regard to mail-in ballots errors, allowing them to retain, reject, or return the ballot for corrections. Plaintiffs argue that this fails to give proper notice and opportunity for correction to the voters.
President Trump called on congressional Republicans to attach the SAVE America Act to pending housing and FISA reauthorization legislation, citing the Maryland mail-ballot error.
On May 20, the House Administration Subcommittee on Elections held a hearing titled “Examining Best Practices for Strengthening Election Security.”
Derek Muller of Election Law Blog expects that the USPS will initiate rulemaking regarding President Trump’s Executive Order regarding citizenship verification.
Chad Vickery, Katherine Ellena, and Rebecca Green argue that the United States should strengthen administrative election dispute resolution (AEDR) to keep routine election complaints out of the courts.
Hans von Spakovsky argues in the Daily Wire that critics who say Louisiana v. Callais“gutted” the Voting Rights Act have it backward, contending that the ruling restores the VRA to its original anti-discrimination purpose.
As discussed above in the introduction section, American Politics Research has released a journal article by Professor Christian Fong that finds even voter fraud that is not outcome determinative undermines legitimacy and that there is some evidence that voter ID laws significantly increase the winner’s legitimacy. Professor Fong’s research was supported by the Grant Institute.
The Election Integrity Network released its Model Election Laws Handbook, a state-by-state legislative drafting guide organized around ten principles the group describes as a “U.S. Citizens Elections Bill of Rights.” The handbook provides model statutory language intended for adoption by state legislatures.
The Grant Institute has potential openings for junior level attorneys and others interested in the study of election administration and voting issues. Interested candidates should please email their resume to info@grantdemocracy.org.