A review by The Washington Post of nearly 90 state and federal voting lawsuits found that
judges have been broadly skeptical as Republicans use claims of voter fraud to argue against such changes, declining to endorse the GOP’s arguments or dismissing them as they examined limits on mail voting. In no case did a judge back President Trump’s view — refuted by experts — that fraud is a problem significant enough to sway a presidential election.
Some of the Democrats’ wins have been preliminary. And in many cases, judges issued split decisions, granting some of the changes sought by liberal plaintiffs and otherwise maintaining the status quo as favored by Republicans.
But The Post found that judges appointed by Republicans and Democrats alike have been dubious of GOP arguments that lowering barriers to mail voting could lead to widespread fraud.
“Do you have any evidence of any voter fraud actually existent in Montana in the last 10 to 20 years?” District Judge Dana L. Christensen, an appointee of President Barack Obama, pressed a GOP lawyer in a Missoula courtroom last week.
“No,” said the lawyer, James Bopp Jr., who is representing Republicans in a suit challenging the state’s decision to allow counties to run all-mail elections this fall. “No. But it is, with all due respect, I understand your question, but, no, it’s irrelevant.”
So far, GOP lawyers have scored several defensive wins related to mail ballots, such as maintaining North Carolina’s witness requirement and keeping in place limitations on third parties collecting and returning ballots or applications, which Republicans deride as “harvesting,” in Florida, Minnesota and Michigan.
Two other high-profile voting cases have also gone for Republicans, at least for now: In Florida, a federal appeals court
sided with GOP state leaders who passed a law requiring people convicted of felonies to pay off fines before they can vote. And in Texas, Republican officials have successfully
fended off efforts to make absentee voting available to those who fear exposure to the coronavirus.
But when it comes to setting the rules for the election, the results of litigation so far show that Republicans have struggled to offer proof for their claims about the risk of widespread voter fraud, according to court filings and oral arguments reviewed by The Post. In several cases, GOP lawyers cited minor episodes of alleged fraud that occurred in other states in past years, prompting rebukes from judges. And the RNC, which initially trumpeted several lawsuits against individual states, dropped its legal fight in California after the state legislature approved the Democratic governor’s plan to proactively mail ballots to voters A similar RNC case in Nevada was
dismissed last week by a federal judge.
In his order, Judge James C. Mahan of the District of Nevada, who was appointed by President George W. Bush, wrote that “the alleged injuries are speculative.”
“Not only have plaintiffs failed to allege a substantial risk of voter fraud, the State of Nevada has its own mechanisms for deterring and prosecuting voter fraud,” he
added.