Since taking office, he and his staff have been committed to maintaining a laser-like focus on the task at hand: ensuring the accuracy of the active voter list. Utilizing data from various government sources, they diligently work to identify and remove individuals who have either relocated or passed away, ensuring that the voter list remains up-to-date and reliable.
Hoen expressed his disappointment with the lawsuit, describing it as an unfortunate distraction during a crucial election year. In response, the state countered by stating that the data presented by the Republicans in the lawsuit were highly flawed. They compared the RNC’s analysis to comparing apples to orangutans, emphasizing the vast differences. Lawyers representing former President Donald Trump made unfounded claims that over 1,500 deceased individuals in Nevada had voted in the 2020 elections, and alleged that an additional 42,000 individuals had voted twice in the state.
Republicans and conservative activists are employing various tactics leading up to the presidential election in November, with the aim of purging voter rolls of individuals they deem ineligible. The Nevada lawsuit serves as a prime example of these efforts, causing concern among election experts who fear potential obstacles to voter access.
Election officials routinely update voter statuses, and Hoen is no exception. When election mail is consistently returned or death notices are received, he moves voters from active to inactive status. Conversely, he updates the status to active when he obtains motor vehicle records for newly registered voters.
Nevada is also part of ERIC, the Electronic Registration Information Center, which is an interstate data-sharing agreement aimed at assisting states in maintaining accurate voter lists. However, ERIC has faced controversy and conspiracy theories, resulting in the departure of nine Republican-led states in the last two years.
In an interview with Stateline, Hoen expressed his skepticism about the accuracy of the numbers used in the lawsuit. He stated that he was not consulted or asked about voter roll maintenance, and no one approached him to discuss the matter. Hoen emphasized that his office follows the law and takes every necessary measure to ensure the integrity of the voter rolls.
The RNC has recently filed a lawsuit against Michigan, following a similar lawsuit filed last month. Moreover, conservative groups have been filing lawsuits in several other states, aiming to obtain access to state voter registration lists. These groups argue that the lists may be inflated.
States like Georgia and Indiana have implemented measures to simplify the process of removing registered voters from the electoral rolls. Additionally, there are groups aligned with Trump who have developed data analysis tools to assist in the undertaking of widespread challenges to voter registrations.
Maintaining accurate voter lists is crucial for election administration, according to election experts. However, they express concern that the challenges and lawsuits associated with this process could give credibility to baseless allegations of widespread voter fraud. Moreover, they worry that it may impose unnecessary burdens on voters, who may be required to provide proof of their eligibility shortly before an election. Additionally, election offices could be overwhelmed with frivolous data requests and challenges.
David Becker, founder and executive director of the Center for Election Innovation & Research, a nonpartisan organization that advises local election officials nationwide, expressed concern about the timing of mass challenges during the presidential primaries and months before a major election. He questioned whether the intention behind these challenges is to create chaos and confusion among voters rather than genuinely maintaining voter lists.
Voter challenges, according to him, are not necessarily negative. There are valid reasons for initiating a challenge. For instance, a voter may want to inform an election official if their neighbor has passed away or relocated.
Becker worries that widespread challenges and lawsuits may compromise the accuracy of voter lists, potentially causing issues at polling stations. This could result in an increased number of provisional ballots and longer wait times, which could be exploited by candidates who claim that the election was stolen.
Mass voter challenges
This Article Includes
In 2021, Georgia implemented a law granting residents the freedom to lodge unlimited challenges to voter registrations. Additionally, it mandated local election officials to promptly address these challenges within a span of 10 business days. Consequently, a substantial number of registrations were subjected to scrutiny, prompting local officials to work tirelessly to verify the information and issue timely responses.
In the following year, the county elections supervisor, Zach Manifold, revealed that 10 election staffers in Gwinnett County, Georgia, dedicated over 40 consecutive days to address a staggering 47,000 challenges during the midterm election. According to Fair Fight, a local voting rights organization, the data indicated that these challenges unfairly affected individuals from marginalized communities, particularly people of color and younger voters.
According to Manifold, the voter roll in the county is constantly being updated and is considered a dynamic document. His office handles numerous routine changes on a weekly basis. In addition to regular updates at the county level, Georgia also conducts extensive list maintenance every other year. Manifold also mentioned that being a member of ERIC further enhances their efforts to ensure the accuracy of the voter roll.
In January, a federal judge made a ruling stating that mass challenges in Georgia are not considered illegal intimidation. However, he did highlight the fact that the list of potentially ineligible voters, which conservative activists compiled to contest registrations, lacked reliability and came close to being reckless.
2022’s mass challenges may reoccur this year, creating a similar scenario.
The Georgia legislature, led by Republicans, recently approved a bill aimed at providing clearer guidelines for existing voting laws. The bill establishes criteria for determining probable cause to challenge voters and specifies the amount of evidence required for a successful challenge. Additionally, it prohibits the removal of voter registrations within 45 days of an election.
During a March committee hearing, Republican state Sen. Max Burns, one of the sponsors of the bill, expressed optimism that the legislation could potentially reduce the number of challenges. While some Democrats expressed concerns about the change resulting in a rush of challenges that could harm voters, Sen. Burns remained confident in the potential positive impact of the bill.
Burns expressed his belief in the importance of cleaning up voter rolls to ensure that people have trust in the legitimacy of those listed on them.
Republican Governor Brian Kemp, who previously served as Georgia’s secretary of state, has until early May to sign the legislation. According to his office, there will be a comprehensive review process.
Last month, the Republican governor of Indiana, Eric Holcomb, signed a bill into law that aims to streamline the process of removing voters from the rolls. The new law requires state officials to cross-check voter registration lists with motor vehicle lists to identify noncitizens. Those who are flagged as potential noncitizens will be given a 30-day period to provide documentation of their citizenship.
The New Hampshire House has also approved a bill that permits voter registration challenges to take place on Election Day. Currently, this bill is awaiting consideration in a state Senate committee.
Several right-wing groups are releasing voter list tools to assist activists in scouring voter registrations. These groups claim that American elections are rigged due to voter fraud and aim to address these challenges.
A tool has been developed by EagleAI that scans Georgia’s voter registration records. Similar efforts are also underway in Nevada and Michigan, all being coordinated through the Election Integrity Network, which is led by former Trump campaign attorney Cleta Mitchell. Despite a request for an interview, the network has not responded.
According to Kristin Nabers, the Georgia state director for All Voting is Local Action, a voting rights group opposing mass challenges in the state, there is a perpetuation of false information claiming that the voter rolls are filled with fraudulent voters and are bloated. This misinformation puts a significant burden on election offices.
More lawsuits
Court cases that make voter rolls public are assisting challenges to registrations.
According to Lauren Bowman Bis, the director of communications and engagement for the Public Interest Legal Foundation, there has been a significant amount of uncertainty surrounding elections since 2020. Bis, alongside other conservative groups, has taken legal action against states to obtain access to voter registration lists.
Transparency plays a crucial role in elections, as it helps to instill confidence in the system, she pointed out. Organizations like Bis’ can verify the accuracy of voter lists and prevent the issuance of multiple ballots or the inclusion of deceased individuals by accessing voter information such as names, addresses, and party affiliation.
During her visits to cemeteries in Michigan, Bis has personally witnessed the names of active voters on tombstones.
The Public Interest Legal Foundation (PILF), commonly referred to as PILF, is currently involved in lawsuits regarding voter roll maintenance in Hawaii, Michigan, and South Carolina. In the last four years, PILF has already won lawsuits against Illinois and Maryland, granting them access to the voter lists of these states.
A federal appeals court ruled in February that Maine must release its voter rolls to the Public Interest Legal Foundation. Currently, the group is appealing a recent district court ruling in Michigan, where they argue that the state did not make a sufficient effort to clean its rolls.
The Voter Reference Foundation, a conservative group that shares voter rolls online, filed a lawsuit against Pennsylvania in February regarding their access to registration lists. However, the group did not provide a response to emailed inquiries.
“The voter roll is, without a doubt, the most crucial document for ensuring election integrity,” Bis emphasized. “Our goal is simply to ensure that federal laws are upheld in states or localities where election officials may not be fulfilling their legal obligations to conduct secure elections that inspire confidence in the final results.”
The dispute regarding these initiatives boils down to the data and the approach plaintiffs employ in their grievances.
According to Eliza Sweren-Becker, a senior counsel at the Brennan Center for Justice, a voting rights group based at the New York University School of Law, conservative groups often make comparisons between the current number of registered voters and an outdated estimate of the number of voting-age citizens in a particular jurisdiction.
She responded by saying that comparing high voter registration rates to something improper is like comparing apples and oranges. She believes that it is important for all eligible Americans who want to participate in our democratic system to be registered to vote and remain on the rolls.
Concerns are also being raised by members of the Republican party.
According to Dennis Lennox, a Republican political consultant from Michigan, he may not agree with the way Democratic state officials have modified voting rules in recent years. However, he expresses concern that some Republicans are too preoccupied with filing lawsuits and restricting ballot access instead of adapting to the new early voting landscape to mobilize voters more effectively.
According to Lennox, the Republican party has been taken by surprise and unprepared for the current situation. He mentioned that there is a clear division within the party, both at the national level and in several states. On one side, there are those who prioritize what is commonly referred to as “lawfare,” while on the other side, there are individuals who are willing to adjust and acknowledge the actual dynamics of campaigns and elections in 2024.
