Archives: Newsletter

The Long Shadow of Bush v. Gore By Justin Riemer, President, USGI, and Marshal Trigg, Junior Counsel, USGI Twenty-five years ago this month, the Supreme Court decided Bush v. Gore, settling a presidential election determined by 537 votes out of nearly six million cast in Florida—a margin of 0.009%.   The 2000 election was infamous for, among other things, “hanging chads,” but the broader lesson was about how the most technical flaws in election processes can suddenly become decisive in a close race. Palm Beach County’s butterfly ballot design confused many voters, and Duval County’s split-page ballot caused thousands of overvotes. These issues affected only a small percentage of votes, but in such a close election, everything mattered.  The outcome of that election was highly divisive. Yet a resounding bipartisan consensus quickly emerged that we needed to fix persistent systemic weaknesses in election administration to avoid a repeat of 2000.   Congress responded with the Help America Vote Act

The Perils of Online Voting By Justin Riemer, President, USGI, and Marshal Trigg, Junior Counsel, USGI Christmas came early in Anchorage, Alaska, according to the New York Times.  The Mobile Voting Project (“an experiment that feels both inevitable and impossibly futuristic,” cooed the Times) now allows voters to receive and cast ballots entirely online after providing identification to election officials. The article, while noting security concerns, ultimately presents the initiative sympathetically. Anchorage’s election administrator told the paper they’re “trying to make it even easier . . . to vote . . . so you don’t really have an excuse not to vote anymore.”  That framing is a common one; but is voting a service that must be made maximally convenient? And should convenience be subordinate to other considerations like election security? What the Times largely omits is more instructive. A group of the nation’s leading voting security experts issued a pointed response criticizing

What is “Election Day”? The Supreme Court Decides in RNC v. WatsonBy Justin Riemer, President, USGI, and Marshal Trigg, Junior Counsel, USGI Last week, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in Republican National Committee v. Watson, teeing up a pivotal question about federal election law: Does federal law require mail-in ballots to be received by Election Day, or only marked and submitted by that date? At stake is Mississippi’s practice—shared by 15 other states and D.C.—of counting ballots that arrive after Election Day so long as they were mailed on or before that date. Mississippi’s statute, adopted as a temporary COVID-era accommodation and later made permanent, allows ballots postmarked by Election Day to be counted if received within five business days afterward.   The case centers on the interpretation of three federal statutes—2 U.S.C. § 7, 2 U.S.C. § 1, and 3 U.S.C. § 1—which set a specific “election day” designated

On Election Day and Teachable MomentsBy Justin Riemer, President, USGI, and Marshal Trigg, Junior Counsel, USGI On Tuesday, millions of Americans in several states voted in contests ranging from governorships to local initiatives. The process went smoothly for most voters. But not everything went off without a hitch. A spate of bomb threats briefly disrupted voting in one Pennsylvania polling place and several in New Jersey, leading to an arrest and a court extending polling hours in Passaic County.   Then there were the unforced errors like in Chester County, Pennsylvania. Shortly after polls opened, election officials discovered they had omitted 75,000 unaffiliated and third-party voters—about 19 percent of the county’s electorate—from all poll books. To their credit, county officials appeared to respond diligently by alerting the Department of State, deploying supplemental poll books, getting a court order to extend polling hours, and communicating their response to county voters and the public.   Poll workers also reportedly followed

Noncitizen Voting Issues in the Spotlight By Justin Riemer, President, USGI After weeks of Supreme Court headlines over high-profile election and redistricting cases, this week a federal rulemaking request of all things stole the election news spotlight. Monday marked the deadline for public comments on a rulemaking request by America First Legal (AFL) to the Election Assistance Commission (EAC) to add documentary proof of citizenship (DPOC) requirements to the National Voter Registration Form (Federal Form).

The Supreme Court Takes Up Candidate Standing in Bost v. Illinois By Marshal Trigg, Junior Counsel, USGI On Wednesday, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Bost v. Illinois, a case brought by Judicial Watch, challenging an Illinois law permitting the return of absentee ballots up to two weeks after Election Day. The case’s merits were not before the Court, however, but rather the threshold question of whether the plaintiff candidate, Congressman Bost, has legal standing to bring this suit in the first place. 

DOJ Records Requests Head to Court By Justin Riemer, President, USGI  In recent months, the Department of Justice has written to most states and some localities requesting they disclose their statewide voter registration lists and other records. Many have balked, citing state and federal privacy laws as a basis to withhold voters’ personal information, including social security and driver’s license numbers.   Predictably, the issue has moved to the courts who will likely define DOJ’s authority to obtain the records. Just yesterday, DOJ sued California, Michigan, Minnesota, New York, New Hampshire, and Pennsylvania for refusing to comply. This follows similar suits last week against Oregon and Maine and California’s Orange County in June for its refusal to provide records regarding noncitizen registrants. A South Carolina voter also sued in local court last month to block the state from disclosing her “personal information” to DOJ. The court granted emergency relief before the state was even served and could respond, but the state Supreme Court recently reversed the lower

Welcome to the Grant Institute’s Grant Report. This periodic update highlights key developments impacting election administration, including voting litigation, policymaking, and federal activity. The Ulysses S. Grant Institute (USGI) is a 501(c)(3) organization established alongside Restoring Integrity and Trust in Elections (RITE), dedicated to the study of voting and elections processes. USGI currently has several scholarly projects underway and, as our programming expands, we look forward to providing timely expert analysis and commentary on relevant topics through this update, as well as on our website and social media channels. We also welcome contributions. If you have news, commentary, or other relevant information to share, please submit to info@grantdemocracy.org or to Janey Whitney, USGI’s Jaquish-Kenninger Fellow, at janeywhitney@grantdemocracy.org for inclusion in the Grant Report. We are happy to promote studies, papers, projects, events, job openings, and other newsworthy items to those interested in voting and election administration. Justin Riemer, President, USGI Alaska Ten individuals born in American Samoa but now