CLC, North Dakota Voters First Challenge In-Person Signature Collection Requirement During COVID-19 Pandemic

Date
Body

FARGO, ND – North Dakota Voters First (NDVF), a grassroots coalition of North Dakotans working to modernize the state’s elections, filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court for the Western District of North Dakota challenging the state’s in-person signature requirements to place a ballot initiative before voters in the November general election. They are represented by Campaign Legal Center (CLC) and local counsel Tim Purdon. The initiative would make it easier for overseas military personnel to vote, create a paper record of every vote, increase voter choice through open primaries and instant runoff elections, and transfer the responsibility to draw political district lines to the citizen-led North Dakota Ethics Commission.

  • The suit filed in federal court in Fargo seeks an order to temporarily suspend the enforcement of North Dakota’s ban on electronic signatures for this petition, and the requirement of in-person petition circulators and notarizing petition circulator forms.
  • The initiative’s legislative redistricting component is dependent on the U.S. Census, which only happens every 10 years.
  • NDVF must submit 26,904 qualified signatures before the deadline of July 6, 2020.

“The opportunity to create fair legislative districts only happens every 10 years, as it is directly tied to the U.S. Census,” said Carol Sawicki, chair of North Dakota Voters First. “This initiative will put power back into the hands of North Dakota voters. We are not just working to modernize our elections – but to give the people of North Dakota better choices, greater transparency, and a more open process.”

“COVID-19 has harmed so many people. It should not also stop Americans from expressing themselves and participating in the democratic process,” said Ruth Greenwood, co-director, voting rights and redistricting at CLC. “If the court fails to intervene, North Dakota will be stuck with gerrymandered maps for the next decade.”

NDVF became eligible to begin gathering signatures for the petition on April 30. However, COVID-19 creates an environment that is impossible to comply with both North Dakota’s in-person signature collection laws and North Dakota’s public health guidance of social distancing. First, the state requires signatures to be gathered in-person by petition circulators. Second, the petition circulator must swear in the presence of a notary public to certify the petitions. Lastly, valid electronic signatures are not allowed to be collected. The suit seeks an order from the court to suspend these requirements and to temporarily allow for electronic signature collection during the pandemic.

“North Dakota’s laws for petitions signature gathering do not account for the risks of the COVID19 pandemic we find ourselves in,” said Robins Kaplan Partner Tim Purdon, local counsel for North Dakota Voters First. “Given the timing of the Census, North Dakota will not have the opportunity to address fair legislative redistricting for another 10 years and to require North Dakota citizens who wish to circulate or sign this petition to comply with existing statues in the time of COVID19 violates fundamental rights under the United States Constitution.”

North Dakota Voters First seeks to put before voters an amendment to transfer responsibility to draw political district lines to the citizen-led North Dakota Ethics Commission and to modernize North Dakota’s elections.

Issues

Sinner v. Jaeger

At a Glance

CLC is challenging North Dakota’s onerous requirements to get North Dakota Voters First’s (NDVF) proposed constitutional amendment before voters. NDVF, CLC’s client, is seeking to implement impartial legislative redistricting and instant runoff voting in North Dakota.

Status
Active
Updated
Issues
About This Case/Action

Campaign Legal Center (CLC) is representing NDVF, a grassroots coalition of conservatives, progressives, and everyone in between working to make elections in North Dakota serve all North Dakotans. CLC is also representing lead plaintiff Elizabeth Jane Sinner and Lois Altenburg who want to sign NDVF’s petition to get the proposed amendment on the ballot. CLC also represents Whitney Oxendahl, who wants to serve as a circulator of the petition, and Carol Sawicki, who wants to serve as a circulator of the petition and recruit others to do the same.

On May 6, 2020, CLC filed a lawsuit on behalf of the plaintiffs against North Dakota Secretary of State Alvin Jaeger to seek several protections for voters who wish to have their voice heard in the democratic process while also protecting their health. The suit asks the court to waive, for this petition, the requirement that each signatory sign the petition in the presence of the circulator, that each circulator sign an affidavit in the presence of a Notary Public swearing that each signatory signed the petition in the presence of the circulator, that the petition remain in the physical possession of the circulator at all times, and that the signature be a “wet” signature rather than an electronic one. In light of the global pandemic, these requirements make it nearly impossible for CLC’s clients to access the ballot and organize in support of the proposed amendment. This violates the First and Fourteenth Amendment rights of North Dakota voters.

Because the proposed amendment impacts the redistricting process that follows the census, it is pivotal that CLC’s clients get it on the ballot in the 2020 election cycle. If they cannot, the next opportunity to seek fair maps will come after a new state legislative map is already drawn, effectively delaying redistricting reform until after the 2030 census. 

Additionally, the amendment institutes instant runoff voting which allows voters to pick their first-choice candidate as usual, but to also mark their second, third, and fourth choice candidates if they choose to. Then, if no candidate has a majority outright, election officials use these rankings to run an instant runoff process that results in a majority winner. The amendment also establishes an open primary, requires that ballots be transmitted to qualified military-overseas electors by the sixty-first day before an election, and requires that all voting machines produce a paper record of each vote cast and requires a ransom audit of election results.

Plaintiffs

Elizabeth Jane Sinner and Lois Altenburg

Defendant

North Dakota Secretary of State Alvin Jaeger

Campaign Legal Center Challenges North Dakota’s Practice of Rejecting Ballots Based on Handwriting

Date
Body

BISMARCK, ND – North Dakota uses an error-prone verification process that disenfranchises eligible absentee voters when the handwriting on their absentee ballot application is deemed by election officials as a “mismatch” compared to the signature on their return envelope containing their ballot.  Today, Campaign Legal Center (CLC) filed a lawsuit challenging this practice in federal court. CLC is representing Self Advocacy Solutions, the League of Women Voters of North Dakota, and a Grand Forks, ND woman, Maria Fallon Romo, whose multiple sclerosis affects her ability to write with consistent handwriting. Hundreds of thousands of ballots were rejected nationally in 2018, and Romo’s was one of them. Among these, an estimated 32% were rejected because of signature issues. The lawsuit seeks court intervention so that North Dakota must provide all absentee voters the opportunity to fix signature verification issues before their ballots are thrown away. Under the threat of the pandemic, vote-by-mail in the state’s June primary election will be the voters’ only option.

Currently, 36 states have some form of signature match requirements on the books, but they vary dramatically. Some states provide immediate notice to voters if their ballot is rejected, and allow voters to resolve the issue up to 21 days after the election. Others, like North Dakota, do not notify voters at all.

“All eligible voters should be able to have confidence that when they participate in an election, their vote will be counted,” said Paul Smith, vice president at CLC. “Signature comparison is not a science. Even if it was, election officials are not trained handwriting experts. The current system produces many incorrect mismatches which result in eligible voters having their ballot thrown away. These errors – which disproportionately affect those with disabilities, the elderly and non-native English speakers – must be fixed with urgency during this critical election year.”

“Everyone who votes deserves their vote to be counted,” said AJ Marx, president at Self-Advocacy Solutions. “Voting is the way we can all effect positive change.”

“North Dakota’s signature match system is prone to errors, which means too many ballots are incorrectly rejected,” said Jan Lynch, president of the League of Women Voters of North Dakota. “Without clear notification and a way for voters to cure their ballots, too many voters are disenfranchised by this process. Most often, these are people who already struggle with ballot access: those with disabilities, the elderly, young people, and those who learned to write in a first language that is not English.”

Even before the COVID-19 pandemic forced states and localities to consider expanding remote voting options to protect public health, Americans have increasingly chosen to cast their votes by mail in recent elections. Nationally, there were 42.5 million votes cast by mail in 2018. In a presidential election year under the threat of a viral pandemic, that number is expected to surge. This raises the importance of having a smooth vote-by-mail system in which voters have confidence that when they follow the rules and cast a valid ballot, their vote will be counted.

Plaintiff Romo has multiple sclerosis, which causes her to lose feeling in her fingers and impacts her fine motor skills. When she voted in 2018, she was unaware that the handwriting in her signature on her absentee ballot request form would be compared to the one she provided on her ballot envelope to determine the validity of her ballot. She was surprised to learn that her vote did not count in 2018. Ms. Romo was not given notice that her ballot had been rejected. Had she been given the opportunity to fix it, she would have taken whatever steps necessary to correct the issue and make sure her vote counted. Ms. Romo hopes to vote in the 2020 elections.

**

League of Women Voters North Dakota is the state chapter of a national nonpartisan organization that encourages informed and active participation in government.

Self Advocacy Solutions is a nonprofit that works statewide to promote civil rights and equal access for people with disabilities. The organization encourages members to exercise their right to vote in elections.

Tennessee Must Ease Excuse Requirement for Absentee Ballot During Pandemic

Date
Body

Lawsuit seeks to ensure voters can vote safely by mail in the upcoming elections and ensure ballots count

NASHVILLE, TN – The state of Tennessee imposes strict limits on eligibility for voting absentee and even uses criminal penalties to deter people from assisting voters with obtaining absentee ballots. In the midst of a global pandemic, Campaign Legal Center (CLC) and the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law (Lawyers’ Committee) filed a lawsuit today on behalf of two qualified voters and organizations whose many members are not eligible for vote by mail under current law, but wish to avoid exposing themselves or elderly family members to coronavirus.

Other plaintiffs include five organizations facing restrictions preventing them from carrying out necessary voter engagement activities for their members and the community in 2020. Under Tennessee law, the organizations can be punished for giving voters unsolicited requests for an absentee ballot with up to 11 months and 29 days in prison, a fine of up to $2,500, or both.

Typically, Tennesseans have cast their ballots largely in person. Recently, the rapid shift towards voting by mail has revealed how unprepared Tennessee is to ensure all absentee ballots are counted in the upcoming elections. The state gives election officials discretion to reject absentee ballots when elections officials decide, in their judgment, that the voter’s signature on their ballot doesn’t match the voter’s signature on file with the voter registration. This “matching” process is unreliable and prone to mistakes, and because the state does not give voters any opportunity to fix apparent problems with their ballot, leads to disenfranchisement.

“No voter should have to choose between protecting their health and exercising their right to vote,” said Paul Smith, vice president at CLC. “In light of the ongoing public health crisis, Tennessee’s failure to accommodate voters is threatening the ability of citizens and organizations to participate in the civic process.”

“It is more difficult to cast an absentee ballot in Tennessee than in most other states,” said Kristen Clarke, president and executive director of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law. “This is bad enough in normal times, but Tennessee’s laws are particularly offensive during a time when more voters than ever before need to vote by mail because of the current public health crisis.  Criminalizing the mere providing of a request for an absentee ballot is outrageous under any circumstances. Failure to provide a procedure for voters whose absentee ballots were rejected because their signatures did not match signatures on record is fundamentally unfair. And not allowing voters to vote by absentee ballot if they fear that they or their loved ones would contract COVID-19 if they vote in person effectively takes away their right to vote.”

About the Plaintiffs:

Individual plaintiffs:

  • Sekou Franklin – a  Davidson County, TN resident who is not eligible to vote by mail, but fears voting in-person in the August and November elections because he does not want to catch and then bring COVID-19 home to his elderly father.
  • Kendra Lee – a Davison County, TN resident who has asthma and bronchitis, and does not want to vote in-person in the upcoming elections because of the risk of health complications from potentially catching COVID-19.

 Organizational plaintiffs:

  • A. Phillip Randolph Institute – a Memphis, TN-based nonprofit political advocacy and membership organization that works to strengthen ties between the labor movement and the community.
  • The Equity Alliance – a Nashville, TN-based nonpartisan nonprofit organization that seeks to equip citizens with tools and strategies to engage in the civic process and empower them to take action on issues affecting their daily lives.
  • Free Hearts – a Nashville, TN-based nonprofit led by formerly incarcerated women that provides support, education, and advocacy to families impacted by incarceration.
  • Memphis Central Labor Council – a Memphis, TN-based association that acts as an umbrella organization for 41 affiliate unions based in western Tennessee.
  • The Tennessee State Conference of the NAACP – a Jackson, TN-based multi-racial nonprofit organization that seeks to eliminate race-based discrimination across the state and oversees local branches in the state.

*This was filed with the SRVH law firm.

Memphis A. Phillip Randolph Institute v. Hargett

At a Glance

CLC is challenging Tennessee’s strict limitations on who can vote by mail, its criminal penalties to deter people from assisting voters to obtain mail ballots, and the inability for those who vote by mail to fix their ballots if they are rejected due to a perceived mismatch with their signature on file.

Status
Closed
Updated
About This Case/Action

CLC is challenging Tennessee’s strict limitations on who can vote by mail, its criminal penalties to deter people from assisting voters to obtain mail ballots, and the inability for those who vote by mail to fix their ballots if they are rejected due to a perceived mismatch with their signature on file.

ABOUT THIS CASE

Campaign Legal Center (CLC) is representing community organizations Memphis A. Phillip Randolph Institute (MAPRI), The Equity Alliance (TEA), Free Hearts, Memphis Central Labor Council (MCLC), the Tennessee State Conference of the NAACP, as well as individuals Sekou Franklin and Kendra Lee, in their efforts to extend the right to vote by mail to all voters so that in the August local elections and November 2020 general election, Tennessee voters will not have to choose between their right to vote and their health in the midst of the coronavirus pandemic. The lawsuit also seeks to stop enforcement of laws that make it a crime for organizations to disseminate requests for mail-in ballots to voters and ensure that the state cannot reject these ballots without notifying voters and giving them an opportunity to fix any perceived errors.  

Tennessee is one of a minority of states that still requires voters to provide an excuse before they can vote by mail in any election, and its list of excuses is extremely narrow. It is among an even smaller minority of states who have not removed or expanded that excuse requirement for the upcoming 2020 elections in light of the ongoing public health crisis triggered by the rapid spread of COVID-19.

Because of these unnecessary restrictions, voters like Kendra Lee and Sekou Franklin are ineligible under current laws to receive mail-in ballots in the mail. Like them, thousands of other Tennesseans – who are either themselves at heightened risk of complications from COVID-19 or have close family members who are – may be forced into a difficult choice about whether they can afford a serious risk to their health and that of their families’ in order to vote.

Even for those that are eligible to vote by mail, Tennessee law makes it difficult to access that right and to ensure voters’ mail ballots are counted. The state imposes criminal penalties for anyone other than an election official to give any voter an unsolicited request for a mail ballot, which is the form a Tennessee voter must complete in order to vote by mail. This makes it more difficult for community organizations – like the five that have signed on as plaintiffs in this lawsuit – to carry out voter engagement activities, particularly during a pandemic. Additionally, even after the voter submits their mail-in ballot, there is no guarantee that it will be counted because election officials have discretion to reject the ballot altogether because of perceived discrepancies in the voter’s signature.

On May 1, 2020, CLC filed a lawsuit against Tennessee Secretary of State Tre Hargett, Tennessee Coordinator of Elections Mark Goins, the Tennessee State Election Commission, and the Shelby County (Memphis) district attorney general to address these serious deficiencies with Tennessee’s vote by mail system. The lawsuit asks the court to require the state to allow voters who wish to vote by mail in the upcoming elections to do so in order to protect their health. It also asks the court to stop the state from imposing criminal penalties on people who give unsolicited mail-in ballot request forms to voters, so that they may exercise their right to vote by mail. And it requests the court to order the state to establish procedures ensuring that before a voter’s mail ballot is rejected, the voter is given an opportunity to address the perceived deficiency.   

Plaintiffs

A. Phillip Randolph Institute (APRI), The Equity Alliance (TEA), Free Hearts, Memphis Central Labor Council (MCLC), the Tennessee State Conference of the NAACP, as well as individuals Sekou Franklin and Kendra Lee.

Defendant

Tennessee Secretary of State Tre Hargett, Tennessee Coordinator of Elections Mark Goins, the Tennessee State Election Commission, and the Shelby County (Memphis) district attorney general

Self Advocacy Solutions v. Jaeger

At a Glance

CLC is challenging North Dakota’s policy of rejecting absentee ballots because of its error-prone signature verification process without first informing voters there is a problem with their ballot or giving them an opportunity to fix it and have their vote count.

Status
Closed
Updated
About This Case/Action

Background

Under current North Dakota law, when an absentee ballot is submitted, local election officials must compare the signature the voter provided on their ballot envelope to the one on their absentee ballot application form. If the officials – who are untrained in signature analysis and provided with no meaningful guidance as to how to make these comparisons – determine the signatures do not “correspond,” the ballot is rejected and not counted. The voter who cast that ballot is not informed there is any issue with their signature or provided with a chance to verify their ballot and have their vote count.

Because signature evaluation is an unreliable, error-prone process for verifying ballots, North Dakota must provide voters with notice and an opportunity to fix ballot issues to ensure validly cast ballots are counted and mitigate the risk of disproportionately disenfranchising certain voters, including voters with disabilities and elderly voters. No two signatures – even from the same signer – are exactly alike. Factors such as age, disability, education, signing surface, and even type of pen can impact the consistency of a signature. With only two signature samples, it is very difficult to determine the identity of a signer, even for trained forensic handwriting experts. The unreliability of this process increases when the people evaluating voters’ signatures are not experts. In North Dakota, they are untrained and lack meaningful guidelines for how to conduct these assessments.

Under this system, certain populations of voters are at heightened risk of having their ballots rejected because of their signature variability, including voters with disabilities, elderly voters, very young voters, and voters for whom English is a second language. If the state fails to provide these voters with notice that there is an issue with their ballot and an opportunity to fix that issue, impacted voters who cast valid absentee ballots face certain disenfranchisement because of mistakes the state made.

Impact of COVID-19

North Dakotans have long relied on mail-in voting. In North Dakota’s 2014, 2016, and 2018 general elections, absentee ballots accounted for between a quarter and a third of all ballots cast.

In light of the COVID-19 pandemic, however, these numbers are certain to rise. On March 13, 2020, Governor Doug Burgum declared a state of emergency because of COVID-19. As part of a package of measures intended to mitigate the spread of the virus and keep North Dakotans safe, the Governor also issued an executive order waiving the requirement that counties maintain at least one in person polling place. As a result, many upcoming elections in North Dakota will be held exclusively by mail.

As more North Dakota voters rely on the state’s absentee ballot system to exercise their right to vote, more of them will be at risk of being disenfranchised because the state erroneously detects issues with their signatures.

Our Case

Campaign Legal Center (CLC) is representing Self-Advocacy Solutions (SAS), the League of Women Voters North Dakota (LWVND), and Maria Romo in a lawsuit seeking to ensure that North Dakota counts all validly cast absentee ballots.

Maria Fallon Romo is a para educator who works with special education students at a local elementary school. Although she usually votes in person, Ms. Romo attempted to cast her ballot by mail for the first time in 2018. Ms. Romo has multiple sclerosis, which makes standing and walking for long periods of time difficult. This makes voting by mail the most accessible option for her.

Unfortunately, after Ms. Romo cast her ballot, North Dakota determined that her signatures did not match and did not count her vote. She was never informed of this issue and had no opportunity to fix it before she was disenfranchised. Ms. Romo’s condition also impacts her fine motor skills and makes it difficult for her to write neatly or consistently. While she enjoyed the convenience of voting by mail, she is worried she will be disenfranchised again if she votes by mail in the future. In any event, in the upcoming mayoral election in her city, the election is being conducted entirely by mail in light of the coronavirus crisis.

About the Plaintiffs

SAS is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization in Grand Forks, North Dakota that was created by and for people with disabilities. They work with their membership to ensure people with disabilities have their voices heard, including by exercising the right to vote.

LWVND is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization with members across North Dakota. LWVND’s work is dedicated to protecting the right to vote for all eligible voters through advocacy, voter education, and providing direct assistance to voters.

Plaintiffs

Self-Advocacy Solutions (SAS), the League of Women Voters North Dakota (LWVND), and Maria Romo.

Defendant

Alvin Jaeger, Secretary of State of North Dakota

North Dakota Agrees to Court-Ordered Relief Easing Voter ID Laws for Native Americans on Reservations

Date
Body

BISMARCK, ND – Today, the Spirit Lake Nation and Standing Rock Sioux Tribe have filed a binding agreement with the state of North Dakota settling a longstanding fight over voting rights for Native Americans. Once approved by the court, the agreement will be enforceable by court order and will provide essential safeguards to protect Native Americans’ right to vote, easing the financial and logistical burdens that North Dakota’s voter ID law placed on tribes.

Campaign Legal Center (CLC) and the Native American Rights Fund (NARF) represented the two tribes in the legal challenge, which was consolidated with a separate suit brought by NARF in 2016. The two lawsuits stem from the restrictive voter ID law enacted in 2013. Collectively, the two tribes have over 7,000 residents of voting age that will benefit from the consent decree, which will be in force for the statewide primary election on June 9.

“This is a sweeping victory for Native American voting rights, and one that should send a message to other states looking to impose restrictive voting measures that disenfranchise historically marginalized groups,” said Paul Smith, vice president at CLC. “We applaud North Dakota for moving beyond discriminatory schemes and agreeing to provide a meaningful method for Native Americans to verify their residency and protect their constitutional right to vote. In order to have a successful 2020 election, the state must follow through with a robust voter and poll worker education campaign to fully move past their failed addressing system.”

“For the last four years, we have fought hard to protect the voice of Native voters in North Dakota. The ability to vote should never depend on home ownership or whether the government has assigned your home an address,” said Matthew Campbell, staff attorney at NARF. “We are relieved that North Dakota has recognized the need to hear all of its citizens’ voices, and we commend the state for taking these steps to ensure that Native American voters are able participate in the political process.”

One of its strongest protections in the proposed consent decree is a provision that allows Native American voters who do not have or do not know their residential street address to locate their residence on a map at the polls or when applying for an absentee ballot, be provided with their address by county officials, and have their ballots counted.

North Dakota’s agreement with the two tribes will ensure that tribal IDs and tribally designated street addresses are accepted as valid. It also cements commitments made by state officials in February to seek reimbursement of the tribes’ expenses in producing voter IDs and to coordinate with the Department of Transportation to visit reservations prior to each election to provide access to state-issued IDs at no cost.

Read the stories of six North Dakota residents that described their challenges accessing the ballot while living on the Spirit Lake Reservation in the days leading up to the 2018 elections.