Sponsors & Partners

Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee

“Voting is an essential right and expanding access to the ballot is not only in line with our values, it is good for our democracy. While President Trump’s baseless and disproven claims of voter fraud embolden Republican voter suppression efforts, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has made a joint investment of over $10 million with the DSCC to remove barriers to the ballot for Americans across this country. We are in this fight, and we plan to win.”

– DCCC Chairwoman, Cheri Bustos

Pennsylvania Poll Watcher Intervention

Parnell v. Allegheny County Board of Elections

On behalf of DCCC and Representative Lamb (PA-17) we filed to intervene as defendants against a Republican lawsuit attempting to allow poll watching at satellite early voting sites. The Republicans also asked to challenge an additional 28,000 ballots without any basis to question their eligibility.

North Carolina Cure Guidance

DSCC v. North Carolina State Board of Elections

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.

Montana Vote by Mail Intervention

Donald J. Trump for President Inc. v. Bullock

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.

Illinois Vote by Mail Intervention

Cook County Republican Party v. Pritzker

We filed to intervene on behalf of the DCCC on the side of defendants. The Republican lawsuit challenged Illinois’ new legislation that would allow more people to vote by mail, expand early voting hours, improve the signature verification process and make Election Day a state holiday.

New Jersey Vote by Mail Intervention

Donald J. Trump for President v. Murphy

On behalf of the DCCC, we filed to intervene in the lawsuit filed by the Trump Campaign, RNC and New Jersey Republican State Committee against New Jersey. The lawsuit challenges the Governor’s plan to run a primarily all-mail general election in light of COVID-19.

Democratic National Committee

Nevada RNC Intervention

Donald J. Trump for President v. Cegavske

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.

Nevada COVID-19 Election Relief

Corona v. Cegavske

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.

Nevada Vote by Mail Federal Intervention

Paher v. Cegavske

We successfully intervened as defendants on behalf of the Nevada State Democratic Party, DNC, DCCC, Priorities and an individual voter. Plaintiffs in this federal case are attempting to shut down the Nevada Secretary’s move to an all-mail election due to the unprecedented public health crisis caused by COVID-19. We intervened to support the Secretary’s decision to designate this an all-mail election, while still noting that the Secretary’s policy does not go far enough to protect all Nevada voters by referencing our Nevada four pillars case.

Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee

North Carolina Cure Guidance

DSCC v. North Carolina State Board of Elections

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.

Montana Vote by Mail Intervention

Donald J. Trump for President Inc. v. Bullock

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.

Montana Green Party Intervention

Davis v. Stapleton

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.

Nevada RNC Intervention

Donald J. Trump for President v. Cegavske

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.

South Carolina Social Security Number Voter Registration

South Carolina Democratic Party v. Andino

Challenging South Carolina over its requirement that individuals seeking to register to vote disclose their full nine digit Social Security Number on their voter registration applications. As a result of our lawsuit, the State has changed its position less than two months after our lawsuit was filed. The State agreed to interpret the law as only requiring the last four digits of a registrant’s social security number.

Priorities USA

Pennsylvania Vote by Mail Intervention

Donald J. Trump for President, Inc. v. Boockvar

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.

Pennsylvania Four Pillars

Crossey v. Boockvar

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.

Nevada COVID-19 Election Relief

Corona v. Cegavske

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.

New Hampshire Student Voting

LWVNH v. Gardner

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.

Michigan Signature Matching

Priorities USA v. Benson

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.

Michigan Criminal Voting Challenges

Priorities USA v. Nessel

Challenge to two Michigan voting restrictions. The first is Michigan’s restriction on the transportation of voters. The second law is Michigan’s restriction on absentee ballot applications which requires an individual that assists another voter with an absentee ballot application to affirm that she did not “solicit or request to return the application,” and prohibits an individual from assisting another voter in returning their application unless the individual is a registered voter in Michigan or a member of the voter’s immediate family or household.

Partner
Democratic State Parties
Partner
Partner
Hundreds of Individual Voters
Partner