The Markup: September 30, 2024

by Chris Diaz

September 30, 2024

Welcome to The Markup, our weekly insights and analysis of the latest in election law and policy. 


We are tracking 1,796 bills so far this session across 44 states and D.C., with 314 bills that restrict voter access or election administration and 894 bills that improve voter access or election administration.

Arizona: A federal court blocked a secretary of state rule designed to ensure county officials certify election results.

Texas: A federal court found that a law criminalizing so-called “vote harvesting services” violates free speech rights and is unconstitutionally vague.

Alabama: A federal judge ordered the state to allow voters who are blind, disabled, or illiterate to have a person of their choosing assist them with returning their mail ballot application, partially blocking enforcement of a law enacted earlier this year. 

California: Governor Gavin Newsom signed into law bills improving notice before a voter’s registration is canceled and criminalizing interference with election activities. The governor also vetoed bills that would have facilitated voting at county jails and expanded voter access for non-English speakers.

Georgia: Advocates filed a federal lawsuit challenging provisions of a new law that threatens access for voters without traditional addresses. 

Pennsylvania: The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania is weighing whether to invoke its authority to directly address whether mail ballots received in envelopes with missing or incorrect dates must be thrown out. A petition warns that rejecting these ballots could disenfranchise thousands of voters.

Ohio: A lawsuit before the Ohio State Supreme Court challenges Secretary of State Frank LaRose’s recent directive. The directive requires counties to post a notice on drop boxes stating that ballots of voters who have received assistance must be returned inside the board of elections office, where any person assisting another voter must complete a form.

BACK TO THE TOP.


The Fine Print

Court blocks Arizona policy meant to ensure certification of election results.

A federal judge ruled that a provision in Arizona’s election procedures manual, intended to ensure certification of election results, may not be implemented. The rule, adopted after officials in Cochise County refused to certify the results of the 2022 election, would have permitted the state to finalize the statewide election results, even if officials from a county failed to certify their own. The order blocks the state from exercising this option for the 2024 election.

Federal court finds Texas canvassing restriction unconstitutional.

A U.S. District Court judge found that a Texas law criminalizing so-called “vote harvesting services” is unconstitutionally vague. Enacted as part of 2021’s S.B. 1, this law creates felonies for activities related to “in-person interaction with one or more voters, in the physical presence of an official ballot or a ballot voted by mail, intended to deliver votes for a specific candidate or measure.” The court ruled that this restriction is unconstitutionally vague and infringes on free speech rights – and blocked enforcement of the law. The ruling may be appealed.

Federal judge partially blocks Alabama law criminalizing assistance returning mail ballot applications.

A U.S. district judge issued an order blocking enforcement of provisions from S.B. 1, which took effect earlier this year. Plaintiffs sought to block the law in its entirety – the law makes it a crime to provide assistance with a mail ballot application to another person. The court ruled that the state cannot prohibit this assistance for voters who are blind, disabled, or illiterate. Under federal law, these voters have the right to receive voting assistance from a person of their choosing.

California governor signs laws improving notice for registration cancellation and criminalizing election interference; vetoes bills for jail voting and expanding voter access for non-English speakers.

Last week, Gov. Gavin Newsom signed three bills into law and vetoed two others. Newsom signed A.B. 2951, which improves the notice process for voters who have been flagged for voter registration cancellation; A.B. 2642, which prohibits interference with certain election-related activities; and S.B. 1328, which expands the scope of felony offenses related to interference with voting machines and systems. 

The governor vetoed A.B. 544, which would have created a pilot program to facilitate in-person voting at county jails, and A.B. 884, which would have expanded access to voting information for non-English speakers. 

Federal lawsuit challenges Georgia law impacting voters without traditional addresses.

Advocates in Georgia filed a federal lawsuit seeking to block provisions of a new law that allows third parties to challenge the registrations of voters without a traditional residential address. Plaintiffs allege that the law could lead to the unlawful removal and disenfranchisement of student voters living in dorms and unhoused voters. The plaintiffs also asked the court to block a provision requiring that the county registrar’s office serve as the registration address for unhoused voters.

Pennsylvania Supreme Court weighs whether to directly address envelope date requirement; Commonwealth Court upholds ruling requiring mail ballot cure.

Voting rights groups have petitioned the Pennsylvania Supreme Court to use its authority to avoid the potential disenfranchisement of thousands of voters whose mail ballots may be denied for misdated or undated ballot envelopes. This latest attempt follows a recent ruling ordering the Commonwealth Court to fully dismiss a case that addresses the issue due to lack of jurisdiction. 

In a separate case, the Commonwealth Court upheld a lower court’s ruling requiring Washington County officials to provide notice of mail ballot errors and allow impacted voters to cast provisional ballots in person as a failsafe. The Pennsylvania Republican Party is appealing this decision to the state Supreme Court.

Ohio lawsuit seeks to reverse secretary of state’s drop box restrictions.

The Ohio Democratic Party and two individual plaintiffs filed a lawsuit before the state Supreme Court seeking to rescind the secretary of state’s drop box restrictions. Secretary of State Frank LaRose’s recent directive to county officials states that residents may only return their own ballot by drop box, and that ballots returned on behalf of a voter requiring assistance must be returned inside the board of elections office and be accompanied by a form. Ohio law currently authorizes one drop-off location per county, which must be at the office of the board of elections.

Back to the top.


This update is powered by VRL’s State Voting Rights Tracker: tracker.votingrightslab.org