With fewer than 50 days left until Election Day, dozens of lawsuits in battleground states across the country present a complex litigation landscape well before all ballots are cast and counted. Some of these cases have clear echoes of the 2020 presidential election, seeking to raise exaggerated fears of voter fraud, erode confidence in mail-in and absentee voting, and empower local administrators to refuse to certify election results. Others seek to address legitimate concerns and advance free and fair voting. And as much litigation as has already been filed, the number of cases undoubtedly will proliferate in the period before, on, and after Nov. 5, 2024.
Given the hundreds of these cases already out there and the hundreds more likely to come, it can be challenging to identify the most important ones and to get an overall sense of the election litigation landscape. We have identified 10 of the most important or representative of these cases currently on our watch list, plus an 11th bonus case. The cases on our watch list include ones affiliated with major political parties, tackling emerging legal fault lines in the 2024 election, and involving issues of trust in the democratic process and safety of poll workers, which are central to the rule of law. (Stay tuned for updates on complex and fast moving developments in this and related litigation.)
Even now, well before Election Day, certain trends are emerging, as can be seen from the list below. In the wake of the 2020 presidential election, some county and state elections board members sought to delay or deny certification of races over then-President Donald Trump’s bogus voter fraud allegations, but those efforts failed in part because the law did not grant them that power. Illegitimate refusals to certify election results have been attempted in races since then. Now, Trump-aligned actors are in court over their efforts to expand traditionally ministerial election official job descriptions from merely counting votes to conducting open-ended fraud investigations that could run up against certification deadlines. The Georgia case logged as the second item on our list, going to trial on Oct. 1, is an important example of a certification-related case.
On the issue of alleged fraudulent voting, though reviews in several states have shown that noncitizen voting is rare, GOP lawmakers have threatened to shut down the government to combat it (though House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., appears less likely to follow through on that threat, amid reporting on his inability to wrangle the votes in his party). The Republican Party has either filed or endorsed lawsuits over the issue in Nevada and Arizona.
Protection of election workers is another major issue emerging in pre-election litigation. Amid reports that election workers across the country have been bombarded with death threats, Arizona and Nevada passed legislation to protect people working at the polls, and Republicans have been suing to overturn those protections in those states. Much of the litigation on our list is in the same battleground states whose results Trump tried to overturn in 2020, like Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, although litigants also have targeted states that Trump won in 2020 such as North Carolina.
Interestingly, two of the cases involve judges who had or have roles in the two criminal cases against Trump relating to his alleged 2020 election interference: D.C. federal trial court judge Tanya Chutkan, who is overseeing the proceedings there, and Fulton County, Georgia state trial court judge Robert McBurney, who oversaw the Trump special grand jury investigation in that jurisdiction. The list begins with a Voting Rights Act lawsuit now before Chutkan filed in the immediate wake of the 2020 election that has taken on renewed significance, as the civil rights challengers have been seeking court monitoring to avoid what they fear will be a repeat of that race.
- Trump Sued Over Voter Disenfranchisement in Michigan (Michigan Welfare Rights Organization, et al., v. Trump, et al.): Three Black voters from Detroit and a civil rights group filed this Voting Rights Act lawsuit against Donald Trump and his campaign in November 2020, during the early stages of the former president’s attempt to overturn the election results in Michigan. An amended complaint filed in federal court in Washington, D.C., saw the NAACP added to the suit as a plaintiff, the Republican National Committee added as a defendant, and new claims added under the Reconstruction-era Ku Klux Klan Act. Though analogous to other lawsuits against Trump following the 2020 election, this lawsuit stands apart for its potential impact on the 2024 election. Trump’s challengers are asking U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, who is also presiding over the former president’s Jan. 6th-related criminal case, to impose court supervision over his campaign and his party from violating the Voting Rights Act in the 2024 elections.
- Georgia State Election Board Rule Challenge (Abhiraman, et al., v. State Election Board): Filed in August 2024, the Democratic Party joined 10 Georgia voters in challenging new rules purporting to empower county election board members to conduct a “reasonable inquiry” or examine all election documents before certifying votes. The petition warns that such rules, passed by Republican board members praised by Trump at a rally, can throw the upcoming election into “chaos” by sparking baseless election inquiries beyond the certification deadline. Judge Robert McBurney, who presided over the special grand jury that preceded Trump’s criminal racketeering indictment in Atlanta, will hold a live-streamed bench trial on Oct. 1 to determine whether he should declare county board members must certify the 2024 election results within their jurisdictions before the state-mandated deadline.
- Arizona Citizenship Requirement Challenge (Mi Familia Vota, et al., v. Fontes, et al.): In March of 2022, a Latino advocacy group sued over Arizona’s passage of H.B. 2492, legislation imposing proof of citizenship requirements for voters. Their case was consolidated with seven others, meaning it also now challenges H.B. 2243, requiring county recorders to remove voters from the registration rolls if they cannot prove citizenship under the revised procedures. Secretary of State Adrian Fontes’ office has estimated that 41,128 voter registrations could ultimately be affected by the court’s ruling (in a state Joe Biden won four years ago by 10,457 votes). Arizona already requires voters to sign an affidavit attesting to their citizenship under penalty of perjury to participate in federal elections. In the lower court, a federal judge blocked the enforcement of H.B. 2492, but it’s been revived multiple times. Most recently, the U.S. Supreme Court partially granted a motion to stay the lower court’s injunction pending further appellate litigation. For now, newly registered voters will be required to provide documentary proof of citizenship to register to vote during the 2024 election while an appeal in the 9th Circuit is ongoing.
- Arizona Election Procedures Lawsuits (RNC, et al., v. Fontes, et al.; Arizona Free Enterprise Club, et al., v. Fontes, et al.; and America First Policy Institute, et al., v. Fontes, et al.): Filed by the Republican Party and pro-Trump groups in the first half of 2024, this suite of lawsuits challenges Arizona’s 2023 Elections Procedures Manual, which includes provisions empowering the secretary of state to certify results in the case that local officials refuse. In the lower courts, one Maricopa County judge dismissed the RNC’s lawsuit, and another Maricopa judge blocked certain provisions in place to prevent voter and election-worker intimidation. Both of those rulings are being appealed.
- Republican Party Sues Over Absentee Voting in Michigan (Michigan Republican Party, et al., v. Benson, et al.): State and national Republicans sued Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson (D) on Sept. 10, 2024, “alleging that Benson issued ‘incomplete’ guidance…on how election clerks should verify absentee ballots.” Benson’s office reportedly called it an “abuse of our judicial system.” Her spokesperson said: “This is not about the law, our processes, or election administration. It’s about getting a headline that causes voters to doubt the integrity of our election processes.” The case is worth following given Michigan’s status as a battleground state and hub of 2020 election litigation, especially given GOP state and national investment in this litigation.
- Republicans Seek to Purge “Noncitizens” from Voter Rolls in Nevada (Daugsen, et al., v. Aguilar, et al.): On Sept. 11, 2024, the Trump campaign along with the Republican Party’s state and national entities sued Nevada’s Democratic Secretary of State Francisco Aguilar Aguilar (in addition to the state’s Democratic Party and the Democratic National Committee), alleging he had “fail[ed]” to purge thousands of noncitizens from voter rolls. The lawsuit claims to have found 6,136 active voter registrations that were “positive matches” to noncitizens registered with the DMV.
- Nevada Election Worker Protection Law Challenge (Vanness, et al., v. Aguilar, et al.): Like similar litigation in Arizona, this June 2023 lawsuit filed by failed GOP attorney general candidate Sigal Chattah targets S.B. 406, Nevada’s Election Worker Protection Law. The district court dismissed the case twice, but an appeal remains pending before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit.
- North Carolina Absentee Voting Guidance Challenge (Wassenberg, et al., v. North Carolina State Board of Elections, et al.): On Sept. 3, 2024, state and national affiliates of the Republican Party sued in a North Carolina court to invalidate absentee ballots that arrive in envelopes that aren’t properly sealed. Absentee voting favored Joe Biden during the 2020 presidential election in North Carolina, even though Biden ultimately lost that state. In 2024, Trump now finds himself in an unexpectedly tight race in North Carolina against Vice President Kamala Harris.
- Pennsylvania Mail-In Ballots Challenges (Pennsylvania State Conference of the NAACP, et al., v. Al Schmidt; Eakin, et al., v. Adams County Board of Elections, et al.; and Black Political Empowerment Project, et al. v. Schmidt): In November 2022, civil rights groups sued under federal law over a state law that barred counting ballots that arrive on time but in envelopes without dates handwritten by voters or with incorrect dates. In March 2024, the Third Circuit rejected one of their arguments while the case continues at the district court level considering another. A parallel case involving a separate group of plaintiffs is also ongoing. Both are unlikely to be resolved before the election. Meanwhile, on a separate track, a case filed in state court challenged the same state law as violating the state’s constitution. A decision finding the law did violate the constitution was vacated by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court on Sept. 13 because of jurisdictional issues. The case remains pending in a lower court.
- Election Denialists Target Eligibility in Wisconsin (Wisconsin Voter Alliance, et al., v. Reynolds): The pro-Trump Wisconsin Voter Alliance, involved in two failed lawsuits to overturn the 2020 presidential election, and its president Ron Heuer sought records listing “Names, Addresses, Date of Birth and a copy of all wards under guardianship” in their hunt for ineligible voters. The outcome of their litigation, currently pending before the state’s Supreme Court, involves issues of privacy, transparency, and the use of records requests by groups to sow doubt over election results. During oral arguments, Justice Jill Karofsky told an attorney for the petitioners: “What it sounds to me like what you are trying to do is to introduce the fear that there is some sort of illegitimacy going on in the election in the state of Wisconsin, and that concerns me deeply.” It’s unclear whether the high court will hand down a decision before Election Day.
Bonus docket:
- Texas AG Sues to Block Mass Mailing of Voter Registration Applications (State of Texas v. Callanen, et al.): The Lone Star State’s Attorney General Ken Paxton, a Republican who led a failed effort to overturn Biden’s victories in four other states in 2020, filed a lawsuit seeking to block Bexar County Commissioners’ plan to send more than 210,000 prefilled registration applications to potential voters in Bexar County, which leaned Democratic in the last presidential election. On Monday, Judge Antonia Arteaga of the 57th Civil District Court denied Paxton’s application for a temporary restraining order as moot, finding that the attorney general acted too late because the mailings went out already. Paxton quickly signaled plans to appeal. Though not a battleground state, Texas has become unexpectedly competitive this year in recent polls, and Paxton’s history pushing voter fraud myths makes this case another one to watch.