State of Elections — Page 15 — William & Mary Law School

The Future of Senate Bill 97 and its Consequences

Election Law Society · January 19, 2022 ·

By: Zachary Daniel

Shortly before former president Trump called for Texas Governor Greg Abbot to perform a “forensic audit” of the 2020 election in the state, the Texas legislature proposed Senate Bill 97 as a remedy for the concerns over the unsubstantiated allegations of election fraud. If passed, the audits authorized by the bill could easily be weaponized because the bill empowers partisan political actors and the secretary of state over the county electoral process, and simultaneously burdens the counties. The bill has raised concerns among election law activists in Texas, who argue it would have a harmful, long-term impact on the state’s election system.

In the months following the 2020 election, Republican coalitions in states across the country called for audits of election results in four swing states in the name of uncovering alleged voter fraud. In response, the Republican-dominated legislature of Arizona appointed a private firm to investigate the accusations. After months of uncertainty, as well as squandered time, effort, and money, the audit ended and the results were published, showing no indication of fraud. Unfortunately for the rest of the nation, the damage had been done.

Dying to Vote: Merrill v. People First of Alabama

Election Law Society · December 22, 2021 ·

By: Shelly Vallone

“[S]o many of my [ancestors] even died to vote. And while I don’t mind dying to vote, I think we’re past that – we’re past that time,” plaintiff Howard Porter, Jr. told the District Court when he and his co-plaintiffs, other at-risk Alabama voters and associated organizations, filed suit to compel state officials to make absentee and in-person voting more accessible in light of COVID-19. Mr. Porter suffers from asthma and Parkinson’s disease, placing him at higher risk of contracting COVID-19, especially in a public setting.

In Maine, Fight Over Foreign Financing Has Only Just Begun

Election Law Society · December 17, 2021 ·

By: Connor Skelly

A fight over an electrical transmission line in the Great North Woods has ignited a firestorm around the ability of foreign government owned corporations to spend money on electioneering in the state of Maine, with implications that could stretch all the way back to the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision.

LD 194 was passed by the Maine Legislature in the wake of Hydro-Quebec, a company that is solely owned by Quebec’s provincial government, spending $10 million dollars on campaigning against a referendum that would have halted the constructed of a 145-mile transmission line that would bring the company’s electricity into Maine. While entities owned by foreign governments are already prohibited by both federal and Maine law from contributing money to candidates, a loophole still exists that allows them to contribute money in Maine’s popular referendums. LD 194 was meant to close this loophole. The bill prohibited companies with 10% or more ownership by foreign governments from contributing money in any Maine election, including referendums.

Shifting Deadlines: How Changes in the Statutory Redistricting Deadlines Will Impact California’s Elections and Voters (Part 1 of 2)

Election Law Society · December 13, 2021 ·

By: Elizabeth Profaci

After California passed the Voters FIRST Act (“the Act”) in 2008, the California Citizens Redistricting Commission (“the Commission”) has drawn the state’s legislative and congressional districts. Among other provisions pertaining to the work of the Commission, the Act provides deadlines for the release of draft maps for public comment, approval, and certification the Commission must follow. The Act requires the Commission to release at least one set of draft maps by July 1 of the year following the census and the California Constitution requires that final maps must be approved and certified to the Secretary of State by August 15 of that same year.

However, the COVID-19 pandemic has caused delays with the release of census data, which makes complying with these statutory and constitutional deadlines impossible. Recognizing this difficulty, the Legislature of the State of California filed an emergency petition requesting a writ of mandate to adjust the deadlines. In Legislature v. Padilla, the California Supreme Court granted the Legislature’s motion and adjusted the deadlines to require the Commission to release the first map drafts for public comment by November 1, 2021 and to approve and certify the final maps by December 15, 2021. Additionally, the court concluded that “relevant state deadlines should be shifted accordingly” in the event of “further federal delay.” In light of the court’s holding, the Legislature adopted SB 594 in September 2021, which would codify the holding in Padilla.

Louisiana Election Delays

Election Law Society · December 10, 2021 ·

By: Nicholas Brookings

When one thinks of changes to elections, the most common things that come to mind are voting by mail, changes to identification requirements and election locations, and so on. What one does not think about as often are changes to the actual day the election takes place, and yet that change, albeit temporary, has taken place in Louisiana for the 2021 election. This is due to Hurricane Ida, and the massive damage it caused. Indeed, the secretary of state, Kyle Ardoin, stated that 42% of Louisiana voters were impacted by the storm. Power is still out in some effected areas, and some voting locations are still damaged. As a result, the state decided to postpone the elections, moving everything back around a month, with the October 9^th elections occurring on November 13^th. The run-offs, which were scheduled for November 13^th, are now to be held on December 11^th. The governor did this through LA R.S. 18:401.1, the election emergency statute for Louisiana.