Election Law Society

Red Light for the Green Party in Montana

Election Law Society · October 14, 2020 ·

By Cody McCracken

This November, Montana voters will fill out their ballots for federal, state, and local elections. For nearly all these races, voters will only have two choices – the Democratic Party candidate or the Republican Party candidate. While this seems quite ordinary in our two-party dominated political system, which parties will be on the ballot has been the subject of contentious electioneering and court battles for months.

These disputes stemmed from whether a minor party, the Green Party, would grace Montana’s ballots for the 2020 election. In past elections the Green Party was included on ballots and it appeared they would once again as Green Party candidates initially qualified for most statewide races including the marquee races for the state’s U.S. Senate seat and Governor. However, the strange part of this story begins with the fact that the Montana Green Party was not trying to get on the ballot and fielded no candidates for elections this year. The “Green Party” candidates initially on the ballot had seemingly no connection to the party.

Postmark on Validity: Nevada’s Mail-in Ballots and the Constitution

Election Law Society · October 14, 2020 ·

By: Liz DePatie

On Monday, August 3^rd, the Nevada governor signed Assembly Bill No.4 (AB4) into law. On Tuesday, August 4^th, President Trump’s campaign filed a lawsuit claiming the law was unconstitutional. Thus, Donald J. Trump for President v. Cegavske was born.

AB4 was drafted and passed by the Nevada legislature in response to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. The goal of the bill is to make mail-in and early voting easier and safer for Nevadans during times of crisis. Among other things, the bill validates and counts ballots with unclear postmark dates to be counted if received within three days of Election Day

“Give me an absentee ballot, or give me death!”

Election Law Society · October 12, 2020 ·

By Parker Klingenberg

Oklahoma is just one of three states, joining Mississippi and Missouri, requiring absentee ballots to be officially notarized. This is a problem for many people in 2020 where it is difficult to do, well, almost anything without putting your health at risk. Before a major vote in Oklahoma on June 30 for the party primaries and a state question regarding expanding Medicare, the Oklahoma Supreme Court struck down this requirement in lieu of the pandemic. In response, the Oklahoma legislature immediately passed Senate Bill 210, which waived the notary requirement if a state of emergency had been declared or existed within forty-five days of an election. However, they did not eliminate the barrier completely; instead of notarization, an absentee voter must now include a photocopy of a valid photo ID. When the issue turned to the Federal District Court, Judge John Dowdell of the Northern District of Oklahoma denied a request for temporary injunction requesting a curtailing of absentee voting requirements, specifically pointing to Senate Bill 210 allowing exceptions in a state of emergency, writing that “the state has put in place alternatives that do not necessarily require that voters have direct contact with others in order to cast an absentee ballot,” and that the absentee voting requirements in Oklahoma are “reasonable, nondiscriminatory and legitimate.”

Mail-in-Voting: A Showdown in Texas Over Expanding Access Due to COVID-19

Election Law Society · October 12, 2020 ·

By Sikander Zakriya

There is a battle raging in the Lone Star State. No, not the one with COVID-19 – although it was the virus that gave this conflict new life.

A fight over mail-in-voting emerged between the Republican state officials in Austin and the Democratic clerk’s office in Harris County over whether the county can mail all of its residents an application to receive mail-in-ballots. The secretary of state and the attorney general sought to restrain the Harris County clerk from sending all residents of the county an application for a mail-in-ballot because the Republicans claim it will lead to mass voter fraud.

Harris County already sent applications for mail-in-ballots to voters over the age of 65 because Texas law permits those voters to automatically qualify for mail-in-ballots. However, the state of Texas filed suit against Harris County seeking an injunction prohibiting the clerk’s office from sending out the mail-in-ballot applications to all voters because they allege the move would violate Sections 31.005 and 84.012 of the Texas Election Code.

Racial Vote-Dilution Lawsuit Transforms Small Town City Council

Election Law Society · October 12, 2020 ·

By Jeffrey Tyler

A lawsuit brought by the NAACP Legal Defense Fund has finally allowed the Black residents of a small Alabama city to elect their preferred candidates for City Council. Since its incorporation in 1937, Pleasant Grove has not elected a single non-white City Council member – until now. The NAACP’s legal challenge, brought under the Voting Rights Act’s anti-racial-vote-dilution provisions, argued that Pleasant Grove’s “at-large, numbered-place” electoral system violated Section 2 of the Act because Black residents were consistently prevented from electing their preferred candidates.