in-person voting

Opinion: Wyoming Secretary of State Nominee Chuck Gray Wants Residents to Cowboy Up and Vote in Person

Election Law Society · January 2, 2023 ·

By Hunter Hoffler

Wyoming Republican Chuck Gray, the recent nominee for Wyoming Secretary of State, claims he intends to make significant changes when he arrives in the State’s capital of Cheyenne. Like many Trump-backed candidates, Gray believes the 2020 presidential election was a fraud and fears his State is rife with voter fraud as well.

Gray ran on the promise that he would curtail voter fraud despite only three convicted cases of voter fraud in Wyoming since the year 2000. To combat this issue, Gray has openly stated that he wants to ban ballot drop boxes in his State, instead opting for the traditional practice of collecting “all paper ballots.” The presumed Secretary-elect would prefer in-person, paper-ballot voting. In Gray’s words, “The fact that a few counties have moved off of paper ballots . . . is really wrong.”

Despite a heavily Republican constituency in Wyoming, Gray asserts that local elections can still become compromised through nefarious ballot collection practices. As a result, Gray’s campaign for Wyoming Secretary of State fixated on improving election integrity and demonstrating the likely impacts of voter fraud. Hoping to impact his constituency, Gray repeatedly aired the controversial and critically ridiculed documentary “2000 Mules” by Dinesh D’Souza at his campaign stops.

The question remains: what authority will Gray have to implement his election integrity agenda? While in the state legislature, Gray also campaigned on, and promulgated bills to, improve election integrity. In 2021, Gray and his colleagues passed Wyoming’s Voter ID Law, which required residents to possess a valid state or federal form of identification to vote in person. Fortunately for those who oppose Gray’s agenda as Secretary of State, he alone will not be able to implement radical change to Wyoming’s voting procedures. In fact, within the scope of voting and voter registration, the Wyoming Secretary of State’s duties are relegated mainly to the administration and oversight of elections. In other words, to implement sweeping changes to the way Wyoming residents can vote, Gray will need to go through the State’s legislature and adhere to federal voting regulations.

The more immediate concern (should Gray be sworn in as Wyoming’s Secretary of State) is staff turnover in the Secretary of State’s office, particularly amongst those experienced in administering elections. Reducing the collective experience of the group administering elections could lead to trouble in upcoming state and federal election cycles should a hitch in the process occur. To date, one official has vacated her position based on concerns over Gray’s views.

The nation’s voters are broadly divided along party lines regarding the ratification of election security legislation – which is generally a priority of registered Republicans – or election openness legislation – which is usually a priority of registered Democrats. However, Wyoming legislators on both sides of the aisle are concerned enough with Gray’s positions on the 2020 Presidential election and Wyoming election security to propose legislation that would strip his soon-to-be office of its duties to oversee elections.

Opponents of Gray’s proposals fear that the growing number of local and federal candidates running on platforms of election insecurity may spread fear that the election process is flawed. Mistrust in the election system may, in turn, lead to uncertainty, harassment, and lack of participation at the polls.

What is clear is that there should be a bipartisan coalition that works to ensure elections are safe for the people of Wyoming. What remains to be seen is whether Chuck Gray and his principles will be part of that conversation.

North Carolina Voter ID Law Struck Down

Election Law Society · November 5, 2021 ·

By: Emma Postel

Once again, a North Carolina voting law has been found unconstitutional. On September 17, 2021, a Wake County North Carolina Superior Court permanently enjoined SB 824, a law passed in 2018 requiring photo identification for in-person voting. The court struck down SB 824 as a violation of the North Carolina Constitution’s Equal Protections clause, as they found it was adopted with an “unconstitutional intent to target African American voters.” Among its findings of fact, the court noted that North Carolina has a long history of implementing voting laws that discriminated against the African American residents of the state. The General Assembly has indicated they will appeal the Wake County Court decision.

New Jersey Voting Reform: Early Voting Expansion, Ballot Boxes, and the Future of Voting Legislation

Election Law Society · October 13, 2021 ·

By: Tim Intelisano

In the wake of the 2020 election, the American people watched as a plethora of states enacted restrictive voting laws, that would counter the reforms undertaken to make voting easier and safer during the Covid-19 pandemic. 2020 was an unprecedented year for democracy. Election night (or perhaps with the benefit of hindsight, election week) featured drama counting mail-in-ballots across the Midwest and Sun Belt. The entire process exposed the weaknesses of the system. Instead of changing state laws that would allow counties to start counting mail-in ballots as they were received, some states forced officials to wait until Election Day, resulting in delayed results. These delays were cited by many as proof of fraud or vote tally manipulation.

What You Need to Know About Election Observers in California

vebrankovic · October 30, 2020 ·

By: Josh Turiel

For over a century, election observers, also called poll watchers, have been keeping a vigilant eye on Americans as they cast their ballots. These volunteers observe election processes, particularly in-person voting and absentee ballot counting, to detect fraud and other irregularities. Although often affiliated with impartial civic-minded organizations or government election entities, the two major political parties also routinely employ election observers. Partisan observers were thrust into the spotlight when President Trump rallied his supporters, during a September 2020 nationally televised debate, to descend on polling places to monitor the election. Donald Trump, Jr. used social media to draft an “Army for Trump’s election security operation.” Meanwhile, Joe Biden has recruited over 10,000 volunteer election observers. This year’s hyper-partisanship has stoked fears that inexperienced election observers will sow conflict and chaos at the polls.

California counties establish their own policies for election observers (those who plan to observe a polling place should seek guidance from local election officials), but state law sets firm boundaries that provide voters with safe, unencumbered access to the voting booth (federal law is not discussed in this post). Most notably, it is a felony to use violence or coercion to intimidate or compel any person to vote, to not vote, or to vote for a particular candidate or ballot measure. This prohibition extends to hiring or arranging for someone else to engage in such behavior. Violators face up to three years imprisonment.

Election 2020: Tennessee Slow to Protect Voters

Election Law Society · October 5, 2020 ·

By Maxwell Weiss

Tennessee is among a waning list of states attempting to increase voting restrictions during the pandemic. Many states have changed their election laws to allow any voter to vote using an absentee ballot. However, the Volunteer State is one of five states without no-excuse absentee voting this November, despite the significant health risk of voting in-person during the COVID-19 pandemic. First-time voters were also required to vote in-person, until a federal judge issued a preliminary injunction striking down the restriction. The court held that the state’s only compelling interest in enforcing that restriction is securing valid identification from the voter. Since absentee voting can accommodate identification verification and reduce the burden on voters, the court granted the plaintiffs a preliminary injunction so that first-time voters will be allowed to vote absentee this November, if they meet the narrow set of criteria to vote absentee.

While certainly a step in the right direction, this was the only win for voting rights from the Memphis A. Phillip Randolph Institute this summer. In the same suit, the group challenged Tennessee provisions including: criminal prohibitions on assisting voters to obtain absentee ballot requests; lack of opportunity to cure ballot rejections based on signature mismatches; and failure to make mail-in voting available to all voters.