Congressman Darrell Issa sued to prevent California from counting mail ballots postmarked by election day and received within the following seven days, consistent with California law. If successful, literally hundreds of thousands of Californians will be disenfranchised at each election. The ACLU and its three California affiliates have sought to intervene in the case on behalf of the League of Women Voters of California to ensure that California voters are able to have their ballots counted consistent with state procedures.

In 2020, in a nearly unanimous bipartisan vote, Mississippi joined eighteen other states in accepting mail ballots postmarked by Election Day that arrived after Election Day (in Mississippi’s case, up to five business days). This lawsuit by partisan actors seeks to disenfranchise these voters whose ballot is mailed by Election Day but—through no fault of their own—does not arrive until afterwards. In Mississippi, this harm will fall disproportionately on voters with disabilities, older voters, and other communities that rely upon absentee voting. Twisting the words and meaning of Congress, the RNC argues that three longstanding federal laws that set a uniform election day for federal races require that ballot may only be counted if they are received by election officials by Election Day. If accepted, this radical argument would not only disenfranchise thousands upon thousands of voters in Mississippi and thirty other states, but also upend election administration in every state.

Representing the ACLU of New Hampshire and League of Women Voters of New Hampshire, the ACLU Voting Rights Project, ACLU of New Hampshire, Campaign Legal Center, and Brennan Center filed an amicus brief in a federal lawsuit over the federal government’s demand that Oregon turn over its entire voter registration rolls, including with voters’ sensitive personal data such as drivers’ license numbers and partial social security numbers.

The Department of Justice (DOJ) sued the State of Pennsylvania, seeking private, confidential voter data that is protected by state privacy laws. DOJ’s efforts appear to be part of an effort to build a national voter database without congressional authorization and to improperly question the validity of state voter rolls.