Major Pending Election Cases

Mazurek v. Berden

Filing Date:

January 11, 2023

Status:

pending

State:

Michigan

Most Recent Court:

Circuit Court for Kent County (No.: 00306)

Issue(s):

Three Democratic presidential electors have filed a lawsuit against sixteen individual who attempted to submit alternative election results claiming that Donald Trump won Michigan's sixteen electoral votes in the 2020 election. The plaintiffs allege that the defendants conspired and agreed to submit fraudulent results. Additionally, the complaint alleges that the defendants violated multiple State and Federal laws.

Northeast Ohio Coalition for the Homeless v. LaRose

Filing Date:

January 6, 2023

Status:

resolved

State:

Ohio

Topics:

Mail-In Voting, Voter ID

Most Recent Court:

United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio (No. 1:23-cv-26)

Issue(s):

Lawsuit challenging several provisions of Ohio Senate Bill 458. The bill creates a photo ID requirement and eliminates a list of previously acceptable IDs, moves up the deadline to cure provisional and rejected mail-in ballots from seven to four days after election day and moves up the date to return mail-in ballots from ten to four days after election day. The plaintiffs contend that the bill severely restricts access to the poll, particularly for young, elderly, Black and overseas voters. They argue that the law is thus in violation of the 1st and 14th Amendments of the US Constitution.

Brown v. Wisconsin Elections Commission

Filing Date:

December 1, 2022

Status:

resolved

State:

Wisconsin

Topic:

Absentee Ballots

Most Recent Court:

Racine County Circuit Court

Issue(s):

A lawsuit challenging Wisconsin's use of alternate absentee voting sites and mobile voting facilities. Specifically, the plaintiffs allege that under Wisconsin law alternate absentee ballot sites "shall be located as near as practicable to the office of the municipal clerk or board of election commissioners,” but that sites used during the August 2022 primary and the November 2022 General Election failed to meet this requirement. They also allege that the use of certain voting cites advantaged one of more political parties. Next they allege that the use of city hall as an in-person absentee voting site violated Wisconsin law. Additionally, the complaint claims that the use of mobile voting sites violated State law. Finally, the complaint contends that Wisconsin law requires polling places to be in buildings and "not in a transitory vehicle such as a van or bus.”

Democratic Party of Georgia v. Georgia

Filing Date:

November 14, 2022

Status:

resolved

State:

Georgia

Topic:

Early Voting

Most Recent Court:

Superior Court of Fulton County (No. 2022CV372734)

Issue(s):

The plaintiffs challenge guidance published by the Georgia Secretary of State's office that stated that counties could not hold early voting on Saturday November 26th for the December 6th runoff election. The plaintiffs contend that Georgia law allows counties to hold early voting on the 26th and seek an order making from the court making this clear. They also seek an order preventing that Georgia and the Georgia Secretary of State from interfering with early voting taking place on the 26th.

Eakin v. Adams County Board of Elections

Filing Date:

November 7, 2022

Status:

pending

State:

Pennsylvania

Topic:

Mail-In Voting

Most Recent Court:

U.S District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania (1:22-CV-340)

Issue(s):

The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and Fetterman for USA filed suit against Pennsylvania's 67 county boards of elections. They challenge the "Date Instruction" which prevents counties from counting undated or wrongly dated mail-in ballots. They argue that not counting these ballots violates the Materiality Provision of the Civil Rights Act. They claim that whether a mail-in ballot is undated or wrongly dated has no materiality as to whether the individual is eligible to vote, because Pennsylvania law determines eligibility based on the date of the election, not the date marking the ballot. The plaintiffs also claim that the Date Instruction violates the First and Fourteenth Amendment by placing an undue burden on the right to vote. The plaintiffs ask that the county boards of elections be prohibited from rejecting undated or wrongly dated mail-in ballots based on the Date Instruction.

Tohono O’odham Nation et al v. Brnovich et al

Filing Date:

November 7, 2022

Status:

pending

State:

Arizona

Topics:

First Amendment, National Voter Registration Act

Most Recent Court:

District Court of Arizona (2:22-cv-01901-ESW); For new filings see, Mi Familia Vota v. Hobbs (CV-22-509-PHX-SRB)

Issue(s):

Complaint brought by Tohono O'odham Nation and Gila Indian Community alleging that the proof of location of residence requirement imposed by Arizona HB 2492. The plaintiffs the law would disenfranchise significant numbers of Native Americans by blocking Arizonians who reside in physical dwellings without an address from voting, a circumstance that will disproportionately affect Native Americans. They bring claims under the National Voter Registration Act, as well as under the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution.

Cook v. Cobb County Board of Elections

Filing Date:

November 6, 2022

Status:

resolved

State:

Georgia

Topic:

Mail-In Voting

Most Recent Court:

Superior Court of Cobb County

Issue(s):

Plaintiffs allege that the Cobb County Board of Elections, due to staff error, failed to mail ballots to approximately 1,036 individuals who requested absentee ballots. The plaintiffs argue that his failure violates their fundamental right to vote under the Georgia Constitution. They request a writ of mandamus asking the courts to order the defendants to overnight mail absentee ballots to impacted voters and extend the deadline for these voters to return their ballots until November 14th.

Pennsylvania State Conference of the NAACP v. Schmidt

Filing Date:

November 4, 2022

Status:

pending

State:

Pennsylvania

Topics:

Civil Rights Act, Mail-In Voting

Most Recent Court:

U.S District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania (No. 1:22-cv-00339)

Issue(s):

On November 1st the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ordered the county boards of elections to not count undated or wrongly dated mail-in ballots. The plaintiffs ask that the defendants be prevented from rejecting these ballots. They argue that the date on which a voter signed their return envelope is immaterial because a ballot's timeliness under Pennsylvania law is determined by when it was received by the county board of elections. Thus, they argue the rejection of the ballots on these grounds violates the Materiality Provision of the Civil Rights Act.

Pennsylvania State Conference of the NAACP v. Schmidt

Filing Date:

November 4, 2022

Status:

pending

State:

Pennsylvania

Topics:

Civil Rights Act, Mail-In Voting

Most Recent Court:

U.S District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania (No. 1:22-cv-00339)

Issue(s):

On November 1st the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ordered the county boards of elections to not count undated or wrongly dated mail-in ballots. The plaintiffs ask that the defendants be prevented from rejecting these ballots. They argue that the date on which a voter signed their return envelope is immaterial because a ballot's timeliness under Pennsylvania law is determined by when it was received by the county board of elections. Thus, they argue the rejection of the ballots on these grounds violates the Materiality Provision of the Civil Rights Act.

Arizona Alliance for Retired Americans v. Crosby

Filing Date:

October 31, 2022

Status:

resolved

State:

Arizona

Most Recent Court:

Superior Court for the State of Arizona (No. CV 202200518)

Issue(s):

The lawsuit challenges Cochise County's plan to a hand count of all ballots cast before Election Day after a machine has already tabulated them. This is referred to as a "Full Early Ballot Audit". The plaintiff's argue that this plan violates the Arizona Elections Procedure Manual and Arizona law by ignoring required procedures for an audit. Additionally, the plaintiffs claim that the plan would disrupt and delay the county and state's certification.

CASE TRACKER