#

The state of Maine recently went to court to fight against transparency regarding its voter registration data, a position so problematic it drew opposition from both the Biden administration and one of its most fervent critics.

Maine is appealing the federal lawsuit won by the Public Interest Legal Foundation (PILF) over the Pine Tree State’s law restricting who can access voter registration data and what they can do with it.

“The public has a right to inspect election records and discuss any errors they find,” said PILF President J. Christian Adams. “Maine has given the government power to silence individuals from speaking and criticizing election officials for not doing a good job. This case is an important step to stop the growing trend of states trying to dictate how concerned citizens may research voter rolls.”

Maine’s Secretary of State Shenna Bellows wants to keep the law allowing the state to review how its data is used and punish anyone it believes has used it improperly. Opponents say that violates the National Voter Registration Act (NRVA).

In an October 5 hearing, PILF lawyer Noel Johnson told judges in the First Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston that Maine’s law uses the threat of punishment to harm the public by keeping it in the dark about how elections are conducted.

“Congress designed the NVRA to make voter registration and list maintenance transparent, and Maine is thwarting Congress’ design. They are preventing criticism and speech,” Johnson said. 

PILF describes itself as a public interest law firm “dedicated to election integrity. The Foundation exists to assist states and others to aid the cause of election integrity and fight against lawlessness in American elections.” It has frequently challenged election policies, like expanding vote by mail, backed by the Biden administration and its political allies.

Congress passed the NVRA in 1993 to “increase the number of eligible citizens who register to vote” in federal elections, “enhance the participation of eligible citizens as voters” in those elections, “protect the integrity of the electoral process,” and “ensure that accurate and current voter registration rolls are maintained.”

A key part of the NVRA requires that states provide transparent voter registration data to the public. Noah Bokat-Lindell, a Biden administration lawyer with the U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division, said transparency is vital in order to combat discrimination at the polls.

Bokat-Lindell argued laws like the one in Maine could be used to hide unconstitutional efforts to prevent minorities from voting. Making all voter registration data public, as the NVRA requires, gives the public tools to combat voter suppression.

“This is incredibly important to voter registration organizations,” Bokat-Lindell said.

United States District Court Judge George Singal ruled in favor of PILF earlier this year, finding Maine’s law flies in the face of the plain language of the NVRA by improperly restricting the use of the voter lists and imposing fines on anyone who ignores those restrictions.

The law would prohibit organizations like PILF from comparing Maine’s roll to New York’s to identify duplicate registrations across state lines. It would also stop people and organizations from reporting and educating on specific entries in Maine’s voter roll. The law imposes $1,000 fines for every violation, which could add up given Maine’s voter rolls include more than 1 million names. 

Maine’s Assistant Attorney General Jonathan Bolton argued Signal got it wrong in his ruling, claiming the state has no plans to enforce the penalties written into the law.

“I think it’s unlikely anything like that could happen,” Bolton said.

While Maine’s law could have been “worded better,” Bolton said PILF would almost certainly not be prosecuted for using voter registration data to analyze the election process in Maine, given the current policy of the Maine Attorney General’s Office. 

Justice Julie Rikelman did not appear to find the argument persuasive. She noted Bolton’s argument ignores the plain meaning of Maine’s law in favor of an informal, non-binding policy decision.

“Generally, we’re supposed to believe the legislature means what it says,” Rikelman said.

Justice Gustavo Gelpí noted Bolton’s assurance also ignores the fact that a new administration in Portland could easily reverse course and decide to prosecute PILF or anyone else. 

“I’ve had cases go on for years, a new government comes in, they change policy, and it’s back to square one,” Gelpi said.

PILF has been fighting Maine since 2019 when then-Secretary of State Matthew Dunlop denied the group’s request for the data. At the time, Maine’s law restricted voter registration data to political candidates and groups involved in get-out-the-vote efforts.

In response to the lawsuit, Maine changed the law to allow PILF to see the data. However, the restrictions and penalties in the revised statute meant PILF could legally not report on the findings in the data. 

Granite State elections are free, fair, and accurate according to a report issued Thursday by the New Hampshire Secretary of State’s Special Committee on Voter Confidence. 

“Our electoral system works,” said Ambassador Dick Swett, the committee’s co-chair.

Secretary of State Dave Scanlan said while the report is non-binding, he and his staff will review the findings and address areas of concern identified during months of hearings and public listening sessions.

Scanlan said Thursday he hoped New Hampshire voters read the report and gain confidence in the elections held in the state. The report found more transparency is needed to make sure voters can see how the process works.

“Voters should be able to see the process and feel confident votes are collected, secure, and counted,” he said.

Ambassador Richard Swett, New Hampshire Secretary of State David Scanlan, and Bradford Cook speak to press about the Committee on Voter Confidence’s final report.

Scanlan created the committee to address concerns about the election process expressed by some Granite State residents. It was an issue former President Donald Trump put front and center in his 2024 presidential bid. While the committee found some minor concerns, Chair Bradford Cook said New Hampshire elections are free from systemic fraud and abuse and they are run by “friends and neighbors.”

“We listened to concerns, but all in all I think our report says and we believe New Hampshire elections are free from any systemic fraud,” Cook said. “Elections are designed to do one thing, elect the people who get the most votes or pass the resolutions that get the most votes, and our elections do that.”

A University of New Hampshire poll released earlier this month found 91 percent of Granite State residents are very or somewhat confident the November 2022 votes were counted accurately. Nationwide, 70 percent of Americans said in October voting was handled well.

Still, the report found more can be done to educate voters and election workers, adding to the confidence voters have in their elections. There is also a need to recruit more election workers, especially as many current election officials are aging and stepping down.

Swett said the committee heard from people who had specific complaints about the process or concerns about how some local election officials operated, which is reflected in the report. He wants to see the report open a dialogue in the state on how to strengthen the process.

“It has in it both the good, the bad, and the ugly,” Swett said. “Hopefully we’ll be able to be able to continue to improve the election process.”

He said that getting more people involved is vital to improving confidence and ensuring the process stays accurate and fair. He said that local involvement by regular voters for necessary to the functioning of that process.

“Being involved locally in your elections is what makes your elections safe and secure,” Swett said. “People need to get more involved by voting, volunteering, and making sure elections are fair and secure.”

The report was signed by seven of the eight committee members. The lone holdout was Windham’s Ken Eyring. He said Thursday he largely agrees with the report the committee issued but plans to present his own independent report to Scanlan that includes more emphasis on the concerns he heard from members of the public.

“I focused on capturing all public sentiment, positive and negative,” Eyring said. “I believe every concern should be presented (to Scanlan.)”

Eyring was involved in the Windham audit movement that questioned the results of that election after problems were found with the 2020 election in that town. An independent audit of Windham found folded ballots misread by machines resulted in skewed vote totals.

A subsequent state review also faulted local officials for compounding the errors by cutting corners ahead of the 2020 election according to a January letter from New Hampshire Attorney General John Formella and then-Secretary of State William Gardner to Windham town officials. Windham officials reportedly used an uncalibrated machine to tabulate the votes and skimped on a practice run that would have likely caught the issue before the election. The state required an election observer to oversee the election in 2022 in Windham to make sure it stayed free from potential problems.

Scanlan said his office is already working on addressing many of the concerns found by the committee, and he plans to bring proposals to the state’s Ballot Law Commission in the coming months for consideration.

The full committee report will be available online in the coming week.