In the United States, state and local election officials work tirelessly year-round to ensure the safety and security of our elections. Included in a long list of responsibilities is the safeguarding of election materials and equipment, such as voted ballots, election machines and tabulators, and other sensitive materials. To safeguard against interference, election officials maintain rigorous chain of custody procedures prior to, during and post-election.
In recent years, malicious actors in several states have attempted, sometimes successfully, to seize — or otherwise unlawfully access — ballots, voting equipment and election records to dispute the results of fairly and securely executed elections.
What kind of interference have we seen at the state level?
Legislatures, courts, election administrators and advocates have been working together to address this very real threat.
For example, in the spring of 2026 in California, Sheriff Chad Bianco unlawfully seized ballots from a 2025 special election in an attempt to sow doubt in the results of that election. Multiple suits were filed with the California Supreme Court demanding that these ballots be returned. In a massive win for Californians and the rule of law, the California Supreme Court ordered, that the ballots be returned to the County Registrar’s office on September 24, 2026.
Additionally, Colorado enacted a law in 2022 to establish internal election security requirements and impose penalties on election officials who provide unauthorized parties with access to election materials, as former Mesa County Clerk Tina Peters did in 2021.
What can states do to prevent unlawful interference in our elections?
As states prepare for the 2027 legislative sessions, Campaign Legal Center encourages states to consider legislation that would codify rules and procedures to protect and safeguard election materials against unlawful interference. An ideal piece of legislation would do four key things:
1. Prohibit ballots and election equipment from being removed from an election official’s custody, including during criminal investigations:
Most states already have chain-of-custody laws in place to protect election equipment and materials, but these laws should be expanded to specify that chain-of-custody must be maintained even during legal proceedings, unless there is meaningful evidence that the materials could be tampered with or destroyed under election official custody.
2. Create internal election security procedures to prevent unethical officials from granting others access to election materials:
While the vast majority of election officials take the safety and security of election materials very seriously, state laws should be updated to protect against the very rare instances of interference from within the election system.
3. Require election officials to promptly notify designated state authorities about subpoenas or warrants for election materials:
States should require election officials to engage the relevant chain of command to properly execute or push back against demands to obtain election materials. Recently passed legislation in California and proposed legislation in several other states could serve as a model for these protections.
4. Prohibit unofficial audits and recounts:
Election audits and recounts are performed in all 50 states by local election officials to ensure that votes have been accurately counted. However, states should prohibit unofficial audits and recounts, as they have historically been taken advantage of by partisan actors looking to sow doubt in the election process.
States and election offices invest millions of dollars and countless hours of manpower per year to shield data and materials from foreign and domestic threats to our most fundamental institution of democracy: voting. Campaign Legal Center encourages state legislatures to further protect against interference by enacting policy to enhance the relevant laws governing the security of election equipment, ballots and other materials.