After a lower court held they were not a valid way to cast a vote, Wisconsin's Supreme Court on Wednesday considered whether absentee ballot drop boxes are permitted under state law.
The lower court's January opinion held the boxes, although previously permitted by the bipartisan Wisconsin Elections Commission, were not specifically authorized by the Legislature, and therefore are not a valid method to cast a ballot.
Steven Kilpatrick, the assistant attorney general appearing before the justices on behalf of the Elections Commission, argued state law gives clerks leeway when administering elections.
"So therefore, there is giving discretion to the municipal clerk to set up these secure drop boxes as a way for absentee voters to return their ballots," Kilpatrick contended.
The high court's decision will determine whether drop boxes can be used in future elections, including this year's upcoming fall races, in which two pivotal lawmakers, Gov. Tony Evers and Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., will be up for re-election. While it barred them at most locations, the lower court's ruling permitted drop boxes at clerks' offices and in other specific scenarios.
It also held people filling out absentee ballots must be the ones to mail or return them to the clerk's office, and ballots cannot be submitted by an unapproved third party. The finding prompted a flurry of hypotheticals from the court's justices Wednesday, who questioned the attorney representing the plaintiffs in the suit on several potential situations.
Brian Hagedorn, State Supreme Court Justice, considered to be the high court's key swing vote, asked how far the chain-of-custody rule should go.
"If I'm mailing an absentee ballot and my wife takes the three steps to put it in the mailbox rather than me, have I violated the law?" Hagedorn posed. "Do we need to decide that question?"
The lower court's order barring drop boxes has previously been both upheld and blocked by the state Supreme Court. Shortly after the lower court's initial decision, they permitted drop boxes for the spring primaries, holding clerks did not have enough time to adopt alternate rules. Later, the high court barred drop boxes for the April general election. In both cases, they did not rule on the underlying legal validity of the boxes.
Support for this reporting was provided by The Carnegie Corporation of New York.
get more stories like this via email
Republican Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has emerged from a long court case with another win.
After nine years and multiple delays, prosecutors are going to drop securities fraud charges against the embattled official. As part of the deal, Paxton must perform 100 hours of community service, pay almost $300,000 in restitution and take advanced legal education courses.
Dan Cogdell, attorney for Ken Paxton, said they welcomed the deal.
"It is not a plea bargain, he didn't plead," Cogdell emphasized. "There is no admission of guilt, there will never be an admission of guilt, because he's not guilty."
In 2015, Paxton was accused of persuading investors to buy stock in a tech startup, without disclosing he would be compensated for the deal. He was also accused of steering clients to a friend's investment advising business without registering with the Texas State Securities Board.
The deal is the second recent legal ruling in Paxton's favor. Six months ago, he was acquitted on 16 corruption charges in an impeachment trial in the Texas Senate but he has not been cleared of all accusations against him. Paxton is being sued by four of his former deputies, who say they were fired after making reports to the FBI he was using his office to help a supporter.
Cal Jillson, professor of political science at Southern Methodist University, said the federal investigation will be handled differently.
"They're taking their time turning over all the rocks," Jillson observed. "If they think there has been illegal behavior on the part of the attorney general, that will be a much different process than the political process that we saw in the Texas Senate."
Despite his legal troubles, Paxton has remained a popular politician. He's been reelected two times since he was indicted. Prosecutors in the case said if Paxton does not comply with the terms of the deal, he could still be tried on the original fraud charges.
get more stories like this via email
The New Hampshire House passed a bill to eliminate any exceptions to the state's voter ID law and requires documented proof of citizenship in order to register.
The bill would eliminate "affidavit voting" for those without ID and give any registered voter the right to challenge a person's voter registration on Election Day.
Rep. Heath Howard, D-Strafford, said challenges would require the lowest burden of legal proof and could prevent eligible voters from casting a ballot.
"It doesn't seem logical to me or fair that somebody could walk into a polling place, sign an affidavit, and take away somebody else's right to vote," Howard stressed.
Howard explained people would have to visit a state superior court to reclaim their eligibility, an often lengthy and costly process. Supporters said the bill simply aims to solidify existing ID law and prevent voter fraud.
Voting-rights advocates said more than 2,000 Granite Staters without identification used affidavits to vote in the 2022 midterm election and strict voter ID laws disproportionately impact Black, Native, elderly and student voters.
Howard noted not everyone has their birth certificate, and passports or naturalization papers can take months to receive. He emphasized several state investigations of voter fraud in 2020 yielded zero criminal proceedings.
"I think that we've experienced enough of this nonsense when it comes to accusations of voter fraud," Howard asserted. "This is just further perpetuation of that's not necessarily grounded in facts."
Howard added the latest attempt to tighten ID requirements could also be in violation of the Help America Vote Act and National Voter Registration Act. A similar law in Kansas was struck down in 2020 by a federal appeals court as unconstitutional.
Support for this reporting was provided by The Carnegie Corporation of New York.
get more stories like this via email
More than 86,000 Wyoming voters have been purged from voter rolls, thanks to a state law requiring county clerks to remove people who did not vote in the most recent election, according to a new analysis by AARP Wyoming.
Wyoming is one of 20 states to purge inactive voters, a policy affecting more than one in three Americans.
Tom Lacock, associate state director for AARP Wyoming, said it is important for people who sat out the midterm elections to make sure their registration is up-to-date.
"For folks who have not voted during the 2022 election, it's really the right time now to get to their county clerk's office and register for the 2024 presidential election," Lacock emphasized.
The high number of purged Wyoming voters is largely attributed to higher than normal turnout in the 2020 presidential election followed by near record low turnout in the 2022 general election. Lacock noted county clerks typically send postcards to those being purged, encouraging voters to contact their clerk to remain registered.
Secretary of State Chuck Gray has also proposed changes to the state's voting rules, which could make it much harder for people who do not have a valid driver's license to vote, such as nursing home residents or older voters who have stopped driving. Lacock noted the window for early voting is also closing.
"The other big change this year is we're going to see the number of days that voters can participate in early voting dropped from 45 days to just 28 days," Lacock pointed out.
A new state law also changes how Wyoming voters can vote in primary elections. Lacock explained people must now pick which party's primary they want to vote in no later than May 15.
He encouraged all eligible voters to make sure they can participate in the upcoming November election, which will determine the makeup of half the U.S. Senate, the entire House of Representatives...
"... and the presidential election, all hitting in the same year," Lacock stressed. "This is really an opportunity to make sure that candidates understand what is important to you, and to stand up and be counted."
Disclosure: AARP Wyoming contributes to our fund for reporting on Civic Engagement, Consumer Issues, Health Issues, and Senior Issues. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email