Sponsors & Partners

Intervened in a lawsuit brought by the Trump Campaign attempting to stop the counting of absentee ballots in Michigan.

Election day GOP lawsuit challenging cure process in Montgomery County.

On behalf of the DNC, we filed a motion to intervene in a Republican challenge to the extended ballot receipt deadline.

Republicans and the Trump campaign challenged Nevada’s election bill enacted in response to our Four Pillars litigation. The bill legalized ballot collection, adopted a new standard and more generous cure options for signature match, required polling locations on Nevada’s reservations, and many other voting rights expansions necessary for the 2020 general election. On behalf of the DNC, DCCC and Nevada State Democratic Party, we intervened on the side of the defendants.

We sued on behalf of individual plaintiffs, the Nevada State Democratic Party, the DNC, the DCCC and Priorities USA ahead of the June 2020 Nevada Primary Election. The Nevada Secretary of State announced this primary would be all-mail, closing every polling location except for one in each county. This plan will leave too many Nevadans without a meaningful ability to vote, as it excludes qualified voters with “inactive” status and exacerbates existing problems with Nevada’s election laws such as a ballot collection ban and signature matching rules. We voluntarily dismissed the case after the legislature responded to our litigation with a bill that addressed 100% of our case claims.

On behalf of the DSCC, DCCC, MJ for Texas and Harris County voters, we moved to intervene in a Republican lawsuit challenging drive-thru voting in Harris County.

On behalf of the North Carolina Democratic Party, DSCC and DCCC, we challenged North Carolina’s directive that will reject mail ballots for any error with the Witness Requirement without providing voters with an opportunity to cure.

On behalf of the DSCC, DCCC and Montana Democratic Party, we filled a motion to intervene in the GOP’s lawsuit against Montana. The lawsuit challenged the Governor Bullock’s directive that gave counties the choice to conduct the November election entirely by mail due to the pandemic. A district court denied the GOP’s claims.

Green Party candidates and voters sued the Secretary of State to be added to the ballot after our Montana Green Party case succeeded in challenging the misleading petition secretly funded by the Montana Republican Party. We successfully intervened on behalf of the DSCC, DCCC and Montana Democratic Party in the case and the court denied Plaintiffs’ Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction.

Republicans and the Trump campaign challenged Nevada’s election bill enacted in response to our Four Pillars litigation. The bill legalized ballot collection, adopted a new standard and more generous cure options for signature match, required polling locations on Nevada’s reservations, and many other voting rights expansions necessary for the 2020 general election. On behalf of the DNC, DCCC and Nevada State Democratic Party, we intervened on the side of the defendants.

The Trump campaign filed a lawsuit against the Secretary of State and all county boards of elections in Pennsylvania. The lawsuit seeks to stop counties from allowing voters to submit ballots in drop boxes and counting absentee ballots that are not in a secrecy envelope or that have markings revealing the voter’s identity, political affiliation or candidate preference. Their lawsuit also seeks to permit poll watchers in all polling locations regardless of their county of residence. On behalf of Priorities USA and the Pennsylvania Alliance for Retired Americans, we intervened and filed a motion to dismiss the case.

We sued Pennsylvania on behalf of individual voters and the Pennsylvania Alliance for Retired Americans to ensure free and fair elections during the unprecedented public health crisis caused by COVID-19. While Pennsylvania recently allowed no-excuse absentee voting, voters will still encounter numerous obstacles when requesting a mail ballot. We challenged Pennsylvania on all four of our vote by mail pillars: prepaid postage, postmark date, community ballot collection and signature matching training and voter notification.

We sued on behalf of individual plaintiffs, the Nevada State Democratic Party, the DNC, the DCCC and Priorities USA ahead of the June 2020 Nevada Primary Election. The Nevada Secretary of State announced this primary would be all-mail, closing every polling location except for one in each county. This plan will leave too many Nevadans without a meaningful ability to vote, as it excludes qualified voters with “inactive” status and exacerbates existing problems with Nevada’s election laws such as a ballot collection ban and signature matching rules. We voluntarily dismissed the case after the legislature responded to our litigation with a bill that addressed 100% of our case claims.

State constitutional challenge to New Hampshire’s proof of domicile requirements that required all prospective registrants to submit proof of a verifiable act of domicile in order to register to vote, eliminated the option to submit an affidavit to establish domicile, and subjected those who register within 30 days of an election or on Election Day without proof of domicile to criminal penalties if those individuals fail to present appropriate documentation shortly after the election. We won in the NH Superior Court, and are currently opposing the appeal.

Constitutional challenge to Michigan’s signature match laws, which require election officials to reject absentee applications and ballots if they determine that the signature provided with the applications or ballot does not match the voter’s signature on file with election authorities. We contend that the signature matching process is unconstitutional because the State has not developed any uniform standards or procedures for reviewing signatures, thereby allowing elections officials throughout the state to use arbitrary and diverging criteria; election officials lack sufficient training and skill to accurately compare signatures; and the law does not require election officials to notify voters that their absentee applications or ballots have been rejected, nor does it provide voters with an opportunity to contest a wrongful rejection or cure an alleged mismatch.