CASE TRACKER

Whether the federal election-day statutes, 2 U.S.C. § 7, 2 U.S.C. § 1, and 3 U.S.C. § 1, preempt a state law that allows ballots that are cast by federal election day to be received by election officials after that day.

Plaintiff is suing Defendants for violations of the Help America Vote Act (HAVA), alleging that Defendants failed to maintain an accurate statewide voter registration list and used a non-compliant voter registration form that did not require applicants to provide a driver's license number or the last four digits of their Social Security number. Further, Plaintiff claims Defendants admitted the violations but failed to take sufficient corrective actions, such as updating the voter registration list or contacting affected voters to obtain missing information. Lastly, Plaintiff alleges that Defendants' actions resulted in significant non-compliance with HAVA's requirements for elections for federal office.

Plaintiffs League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), the Secure Families Initiative (SFI), and the Arizona Students’ Association (ASA) filed a federal lawsuit in the District of Columbia against the Executive Office of the President, the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC) and its commissioners, the Department of Justice, the Department of Defense, and the Federal Voting Assistance Program, challenging Executive Order 14248, issued by President Trump on March 25, 2025, titled “Preserving and Protecting the Integrity of American Elections.” The complaint alleges that the order unconstitutionally usurps powers belonging to Congress and the states by directing federal agencies to impose new election rules, including requiring documentary proof of citizenship (DPOC) for voter registration using the National Mail Voter Registration Form and the Federal Post Card Application used by military and overseas voters. Plaintiffs claim the President lacks authority to direct the independent EAC or to condition federal election funds on compliance with these new requirements, arguing the order violates the Elections Clause, separation of powers, and the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA). The order also directs the Attorney General to penalize states that count mail ballots received after Election Day, which plaintiffs argue unlawfully interferes with state-established election procedures and voter rights. The organizations assert the order would disenfranchise eligible voters—particularly Latino voters, military families, students, and overseas voters—who may lack or have difficulty submitting DPOC such as passports or “Real ID” licenses, and would harm their voter registration missions by forcing costly diversions of resources. The complaint seeks declaratory and injunctive relief to block implementation of the Executive Order, arguing it exceeds presidential authority, violates federal statutes including the NVRA, HAVA, and UOCAVA, and threatens irreparable harm to voters’ constitutional rights and election integrity nationwide.

Three related series of cases:

(1) Case filed (now resolved) in Wake County Superior Court contesting Board of Elections alleged delay in reaching a decision on challenges to validity of certain ballots; Griffin asserted that the ballots should not be counted due to voters not providing required information when registering, overseas voters never residing in NC, and overseas voters not providing valid ID with their ballots.

(2) Case initially filed in the North Carolina Supreme Court seeking to prevent certification of the results of the election for a seat on the North Carolina Supreme Court sought by the petitioner; The petitioner sought to invalidate over 60,000 ballots due to the alleged illegalities mentioned above involving voter registration and overseas voters. The North Carolina Supreme Court has referred to this case as "Griffin I."

(3) Three separate cases filed in Wake County Superior Court arguing that the Board of Elections decision denying Griffin relief was legally incorrect, again asserting that over 60,000 ballots should not have been counted due to incomplete voter registration and problems with the ballots of overseas voters. The North Carolina Supreme Court has referred to this case as "Griffin II."

The DNC is filing suit against the Georgia State Election board to challenge the recently-enacted "Reasonable Inquiry Rule" for election certifications. Plaintiffs argue that the rule violates Georgia state law mandating election result certification before a deadline, seeking either declaratory relief rendering the rule invalid or injunctive relief limiting the scope of inquiries in order to ensure election certification can be accomplished by deadline.

The RNC is challenging the executive order of Michigan governor Gretchen Whitmer designating several federal and state entities as voter registration agencies. Plaintiffs allege that the governor of Michigan lacks the legal authority to do so under Michigan law, claiming that the executive order violates the National Voter Registration Act and several Michigan state laws. Plaintiffs seek declaratory and injunctive relief to remove VRA status from agencies impacted by the executive order and to render any future executive orders granting VRA status invalid.

The AFPI is suing the Biden administration regarding Executive Order 14019. Plaintiffs allege that the contested executive order compromises the authority states hold to conduct elections by requiring federal agencies to develop voter registration programs. The AFPI seeks declaratory and injunctive relief to strike Executive Order 14019 down as unconstitutional and block federal agencies from developing and implementing voter registration programs.