Campaign Legal Center (CLC) has achieved a victorious settlement in a lawsuit filed to prevent New York from erroneously rejecting voters’ mail ballots. Due to the changes in state law that this lawsuit inspired, the rejection rate for mail ballots fell from 14% in the 2018 general election to 4% in the 2020 general election, and nearly 9,000...
Establishing Fair Policies for Voting in States with Signature Match Requirements
At a Glance
Campaign Legal Center (CLC) is fighting to require states that use signature match policies to examine mail-in ballots also have “notice and cure” procedures so that voters’ ballots aren’t rejected due to perceived penmanship issues. Amid the COVID-19 pandemic, this issue has gained urgency as more voters choose to use mail-in ballots.Back to top
About this Action
At all times, but especially during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, voters need access to safe, secure, reliable options for voting. One option should be voting-by-mail or casting a mail ballot. About 6 in 10 voters plan to vote by mail or cast a mail-in nationwide, according to a Washington Post/University of Maryland poll released in September. In order to confirm the identity of the person submitting the ballot, at least 31 states rely on signature match procedures as part of their counting or verification procedures, to the best of Campaign Legal Center’s (CLC) knowledge.
Signature matching laws require election officials to compare the signatures voters provide on their ballots to the signatures on their voter registration or mail ballot request forms. If election officials determine the signatures do not match, the ballot is rejected and not counted. Signature evaluation is notoriously unreliable and error-prone. It can result in ballot rejections based on nothing more than poor penmanship.
These errors also do not affect all voters equally. Voters with disabilities, the elderly, non-native English speakers, and racial minorities are all more likely to have their ballots rejected due to signature match issues. This is especially troubling given that many of these groups are more susceptible to contracting a serious illness from COVID-19 and have experienced more harm due to anti-voter laws, like restrictive photo ID requirements, polling place closures and state voter roll purges.
Therefore, when a state relies on signature matching to verify mail ballots, it must provide voters notice of signature problems, and a meaningful opportunity to verify their identity and ensure their votes are counted. These so-called “notice and cure” policies are mandated by U.S. Constitution.
Some notice and cure policies protect against erroneous rejection better than others. The most effective policies share two important features:
- Notice and Cure by Phone. The most efficient and effective way to notify voters about signatures issues is by phone—not mail. In a quick call, a voter can verify their identity and have their vote counted. Mail can be delayed, especially near Election Day, making it difficult to fix issues before the election concludes. In the North Dakota’s June 2020 primary, as shown below, 83% of voters notified by phone were able to verify their ballot in time to be counted as compared to only 34% of voters notified by mail alone. States must make every effort to contact voters by mail and phone where possible, and permit voters to verify their ballot with any oral or written response.
- Sufficient Time to Cure. Voters must have time to fix ballot problems before election results are finalized. States should create sufficient time in two ways: (i) allowing election officials to begin processing and verifying mail-in ballots as they are received or at least five days before Election Day, and (ii) permitting voters to fix ballot issues for a maximum possible time after Election Day.
So far, nine states—including Maine, North Dakota, New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania—have created notice and cure policies in 2020 after lawsuits or advocacy by CLC and allied organizations. Four states—Tennessee, Mississippi, Arkansas, and South Dakota—still do not have any notice and cure policy; all but South Dakota are now in pending litigation.