The Eleventh Circuit vacated the injunction of Georgia’s ban on gift giving to voters in line to cast their ballots. The Court remanded the case to the district court to conduct a new analysis under the correct legal standard.
The United States Supreme Court agreed to decide whether states can count mail-in ballots received after Election Day in Watson v. RNC . The RNC brought this lawsuit in January 2024, and the Fifth Circuit held that mail-in ballots received after Election Day cannot be counted.
The RNC filed a lawsuit against Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson after the Secretary issued guidance that permits non-residents to vote in state elections. In the same lawsuit, the RNC is also challenging a Michigan law that likewise purports to allow non-residents to vote in Michigan.
The RNC filed a comment urging the North Carolina State Board of Elections to ensure the Statewide Elections Information Management System complies with HAVA. The NCBE was seeking public comments regarding the Board’s efforts to modernize the SEIMS.
Status of State Litigation
Arizona
RNC v. Fontes, No. 24-050553 (Ariz. S. Ct.)
Issue: Arizona’s Secretary of State adopted the 2023 Elections ProceduresManual without going through Arizona’s rulemaking process.
RNC’s Role: Plaintiff
Status: The Arizona Court of Appeals held that the Secretary had failed to follow Arizona’s rulemaking process in adopting the 2023 EPM. The Arizona Supreme Court heard oral argument on October 14 and issued an order holding that Arizona’s APA does not apply to promulgation of the 2023 EPM. A full opinion is forthcoming.
Mi Familia Vota v. Hobbs II, No. 24-3188 (9th Cir.)
Issue: Arizona added a documentary proof of citizenship requirement to its voter registration form.
RNC’s Role: Intervenor-Defendant
Status: After the United States Supreme Court allowed Arizona to enforce its proof-of-citizenship requirement for the 2024 election while the parties continued to litigate the merits of the law, the Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court’s injunction again in in April 2025. The Ninth Circuit denied the RNC’s petition for en banc review.
Mi Familia Vota v. Hobbs I, No. 21-CV-01423 (D. Ariz.)
Issue: Arizona created a new protocol to remove voters from the Active Early Voting List (i.e., the list of voters who automatically receive mail-in ballots) if they don’t cast an early ballot in any election over two election cycles and don’t respond to a follow-up notice.
RNC’s Role: Intervenor-Defendant
Status: In June 2022, the judge dismissed all the claims except the plaintiffs’ claim that the Active Early Voting List reform law was motivated by discriminatory animus. The parties are currently engaged in discovery.
RNC v. Arizona, CV2025-022859 (Ariz. Sup. Ct.)
Issue: The RNC sued the State of Arizona for permitting individuals who have never resided in the United States, let alone in the State of Arizona, to register to vote in Arizona.
RNC’s Role: Intervenor-Defendant
Status: The State of Arizona moved to dismiss the RNC’s complaint, and the court denied the motion, allowing the case to proceed.
District of Columbia
LULAC v. Trump, No. 1:25-cv-946 (D.D.C.)
Issue: The Executive Order targets a number of important election integrity efforts, including proof of citizenship to register to vote; removal of non-citizens from voter rolls; and only counting mail-in ballots received by election day.
RNC’s Role: Intervenor-Defendant
Status : The district court granted the RNC’s motion to intervene. The court granted a preliminary injunction, partially enjoining portions of the President’s Executive Order. Cross-motions for summary judgment were fully briefed. The court granted the plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgement on the proof-of-citizenship provision and granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgement on the APA claims.
Florida
Florida Rising Together v. Byrd, No. 6:24-cv-01682 (M.D. Fla.)
Issue: Florida law requires the registration information to be an exact match to data maintained by the Florida government or the federal government.
RNC’s Role: Intervenor-Defendant
Status : The district court dismissed plaintiffs’ first complaint for failing to join all of the county supervisors as defendants and for failing to specify which defendants were liable for each claim. Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint, and the RNC’s response to the amended complaint is due soon. The parties are also briefing motions to dismiss.
Vote.Org v. Byrd , No. 4:23-cv-00111 (11th Cir.)
Issue: Florida law requires an original signature (wet signature) on voter registration forms.
RNC’s Role: Intervenor-Defendant
Status: The district court upheld the wet signature requirement, and the plaintiffs appealed. The Eleventh Circuit heard oral argument on May 8, and the parties are waiting on a decision.
Georgia
Fulton County GOP v. Fulton County Board of Commissioners, No. 25CV008083 (Ga. Sup. Ct. Fulton Cnty.)
Issue: The Fulton County Board of Commissioners refused to appoint the Fulton County GOP’s nominees to the Board of Elections.
RNC’s Role: Plaintiff
Status : A judge ordered the Board to appoint the Republican nominees, but the Democratic Commissioners refused to do so. In late August, the trial court found the Board in contempt and the County is currently appealing the decision on the merits as well as the decision on contempt. The RNC is currently preparing its response to the Board’s initial briefs.
VoteAmerica v. Raffensperger , No. 1:21-cv-1390 (N.D. Ga.)
Issue: SB202 prohibits groups from prefilling absentee-ballot applications and sending duplicate applications to voters.
RNC’s Role: Intervenor-Defendant
Status: The district court upheld Georgia’s prohibitions, which help reduce voter confusion, support voter confidence, and make elections more secure.
Coalition for Good Governance v. Raffensperger, No. 25-11347 (11th Cir.)
Issue: SB202 allows the State Election Board to temporarily suspend election superintendents after they commit multiple violations of law. SB202 also made it a felony to intentionally observe someone casting a ballot such that the observer can see who the elector voted for. It also strengthens protections for tallying ballots.
RNC’s Role: Intervenor-Defendant
Status: The district court granted summary judgment in favor of the State of Georgia, dismissing the case. Plaintiffs have appealed, and the RNC joined the State’s response brief on September 15, 2025, asking the Eleventh Circuit to affirm dismissal.
In re SB 202, No. 23-13085 (N.D. Ga.; 11th Cir.)
Issue: SB202 prohibits the mailing of unsolicited absentee ballot applications; requires identification to request an absentee ballot; shortens the application window for absentee ballot requests; restricts the use of drop boxes; prohibits the giving of money and gifts at polling places; and restricts the counting of out-of-precinct provisional ballots.
RNC’s Role: Intervenor-Defendant
Status : The court preliminarily enjoined the birthdate requirement on absentee ballots and the 25-foot line-warming prohibition for the 2024 elections. The Eleventh Circuit vacated the injunction of Georgia’s line-warming prohibition and remanded the case to the district court to conduct a new analysis under the correct legal standard. The Court did not address the birthdate requirement. Separately, the parties are waiting on the district court’s decision on summary judgment on the remaining issues.
Hawaii
RNC v. State of Hawaii, Office of Elections, No. CCV-25-0001691 (D. Haw.)
Issue: Hawaii failed to turn over any documents in response to the RNC’s public records requests for information about Hawaii’s voter-list maintenance.
RNC’s Role: Plaintiff
Status: The RNC filed a complaint on October 14. The State filed a motion to dismiss, and the RNC’s reply is due December 31. The court scheduled a hearing for January 8, 2026.
Illinois
Bost v. Illinois Board of Elections, No. 23-2644 (S. Ct.)
Issue: Whether federal candidates have standing to challenge an election-day receipt deadline law.
RNC’s Role: Amicus
Status: The Seventh Circuit held that federal candidates do not have standing to challenge the Illinois law. The RNC filed an amicus brief in support of Bost in the Seventh Circuit. The United States Supreme Court heard argument on October 8, 2025. The RNC filed another amicus brief in support of Bost at the Supreme Court on July 29, 2025.
Indiana
Count Us In v. Morales, No. 1:25-cv-00864 (S.D. Ind.)
Issue: Indiana law bans the use of student identification cards to vote.
RNC’s Role: Amicus
Status: The RNC filed an amicus brief on July 17 in support of the state.
Kansas
Kansas Appleseed Center v. Schwab, No. 2:2025cv02375 (Ks. D. Ct. Douglas Cnty.)
Issue: Kansas passed a law that requires all mail-in ballots to be received by election day.
RNC’s Role: Intervenor-Defendant
Status: The RNC filed a motion to intervene to help the Secretary of State defend against this challenge, which seeks to enjoin the Kansas law and extend the existing receipt deadline from 3 days to 7 days after election day. The district court denied the RNC’s motion to intervene.
Michigan
RNC v. Benson (Mich. Ct. Cl.)
Issue: Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson issued an election manual that permits noncitizens to vote in state elections. Michigan law also permits noncitizens, and non-residents of Michigan, to vote in state elections.
RNC’s Role: Plaintiff
Status: The RNC filed the complaint on November 21.
RNC v. Benson , No. 1:24-cv-262-JMB (Mich. Ct. Cl.)
Issue: Michigan law authorizes tabulating ballots only when the number on the ballot stub matches the number on the ballot envelope, but the Secretary of State ordered the tabulation of ballots even when the numbers did not match.
RNC’s Role: Plaintiff
Status: The parties all moved for summary disposition and are awaiting a decision from the Michigan Court of Claims.
RNC v. Benson, No. 1:24-cv-262 (6th Cir.)
Issue: Michigan has failed to maintain its voter rolls in accordance with the NVRA, resulting in county voter registration rates above 100%.
RNC’s Role: Plaintiff
Status: The district court dismissed the RNC’s lawsuit for lack of standing. The RNC appealed to the Sixth Circuit, which affirmed the district court’s dismissal.
RNC v. City of Lansing, No. 25-000919 (Mich. Cir. Ct.)
Issue: The City of Lansing failed to provide video footage of ballot drop boxes after the RNC submitted public records requests and instead said it requires the RNC to pay an exorbitant amount to access these records.
RNC’s Role: Plaintiff
Status: The trial court denied the City’s request to dismiss the RNC’s claim that when a requesting party wants to challenge the legitimacy of a records fee, it may do so without having to pay it upfront. The parties are engaging in discovery.
State of California v. Trump, No. 25-1726 (1st Cir.)
Issue: The Executive Order targets a number of important election integrity efforts, including proof of citizenship to register to vote; removal of non-citizens from voter rolls; and only counting mail-in ballots received by election day.
RNC’s Role: Support State GOP
Status: The RNC funded an amicus brief in the First Circuit, which was filed on behalf of the Michigan GOP and a Michigan county clerk to defend President Trump’s election integrity executive order. The RNC supported a similar brief at the district court.
Minnesota
MN Alliance for Retired Americans v. Simon, No. 62-cv-24-854 (Minn.)
Issue: Minnesota law requires that absentee voters have a witness observe their completion of the absentee ballot.
RNC’s Role: Amicus
Status: The Court of Appeals upheld Minnesota’s witness requirement, and while the RNC was denied intervention, the RNC filed an amicus brief in the Minnesota Supreme Court, asking the court to affirm the decision.
Mississippi
Watson v. RNC (formerly RNC v. Wetzel), No. 24-1260 (S. Ct.)
Issue: Mississippi permits the counting of mail-in ballots after election day.
RNC’s Role: Plaintiff
Status : The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals held that the federal election-day statutes require that ballots be cast by voters and received by election officials by election day. Mississippi filed a cert petition in June, asking the United States Supreme Court to review the Fifth Circuit’s decision. The Supreme Court granted the cert petition on November 10.
Montana
Montana Federation of Public Employees v. Montana, ADV 2025-268 (Mont. 1st Jud. Dist.)
Issue: Montana law no longer permits an individual to file a declaration attesting to identity in place of a photo identification.
RNC’s Role: Intervenor-Defendant
Status: The district court granted the RNC’s motion to intervene on October 2.
Nevada
RNC v. Aguilar, No. 2:24-cv-518 (D. Nev.)
Issue: The RNC sued Nevada for failing to maintain accurate voter rolls as required by the NVRA.
RNC’s Role: Plaintiff
Status: The district court granted the state’s motion to dismiss the RNC’s complaint but gave the RNC leave to amend the complaint. The RNC filed an amended complaint, the defendants moved to dismiss again, and the district court stayed the motion to dismiss pending resolution of another case that may impact the parties’ standing arguments.
RNC v. Burgess, No. 3:24-cv-00198 (9th Cir.)
Issue: Nevada law permits the counting of mail-in ballots up to four days after election day.
RNC’s Role: Plaintiff
Status: The district court dismissed the RNC’s claims for lack of standing. The RNC appealed, and the Ninth Circuit is holding the case for the Supreme Court’s decision in Bost.
New Hampshire
Coalition for Open Democracy v. Scanlan and New Hampshire Youth Movement v. Scanlan, No. 1:24-cv-00291 (D.N.H.)
Issue: New Hampshire passed a law requiring documentary proof of citizenship.
RNC’s Role: Amicus
Status: The RNC filed an amicus brief in support of New Hampshire’s motion to dismiss. The RNC is waiting on the district court’s decision.
Robertson v. Scanlan, No. 218-2025-CV-00951 (N.H. Super. Ct.)
Issue: New Hampshire passed a law that requires anyone requesting an absentee ballot to either include a copy of their photo ID, present photo ID in person at the clerk’s office, or have their signature on the application notarized.
RNC’s Role: Intervenor-Defendant
Status: The RNC filed a motion to intervene on October 30. Briefing on the motion to intervene has concluded, and the parties are waiting on the court’s decision.
New Jersey
New Jersey Democratic State Committee v. Board of Elections of Bergen County, No. BER-L-7347-25 (N.J. Sup. Ct. Bergen Cnty)
Issue: The Bergen County Board of Elections rejected more than 300 unsealed ballots.
RNC’s Role: Support State GOP
Status : The Democratic State Committee sued on November 3, asking the court to allow the voters who submitted unsealed ballots to cure the defect. The New Jersey Republican Party intervened to help defend the Bergen Conty Board of Election’s decision. On November 6, the court denied the Democratic State Committee’s request to compel the Board to implement a cure process.
Republican National Committee v. Division of Elections, MER-L-1499-25 (N.J. Sup. Ct.)
Issue: New Jersey failed to turn over records regarding voter list maintenance and the seal audit logs from the June 2025 Primary.
RNC’s Role: Plaintiff
Status: The trial court dismissed the RNC’s claim, and the RNC moved for reconsideration. The parties are waiting on a decision.
Sammons v. Hogan, No. GLO-L-001286-25 (Glo. Cty. Dist. Ct.)
Issue: The Gloucester County clerk secretly redesigned the ballot to group candidates by office instead of displaying the candidates in columns by political party.
RNC’s Role: Support County GOP
Status: The RNC successfully enjoined the use of an improper ballot design. The court ordered the clerk to correct the ballot design to comply with state law before the November 2025 election.
Republican National Committee v. Burlington County Board of Elections, No.BUR-L-002476-25 (N.J. Super. Ct.)
Issue: In August, under the Open Public Records Act, the RNC requested records about ballot drop boxes, including custody logs and security footage. The Burlington County Board of Elections failed to properly respond to the RNC’s request.
RNC’s Role: Plaintiff
Status: The RNC filed the complaint on October 24.
Republican National Committee v. Way , No. 2:25-cv-17612 (D.N.J.)
Issue: New Jersey failed to turn over any documents in response to the RNC’s public records requests for information about New Jersey’s voter-list maintenance.
RNC’s Role: Plaintiff
Status: Since March, the RNC has sent eighteen separate records requests in New Jersey. The RNC filed the complaint on November 17.
Ohio
Red Wine & Blue v. LaRose, No. 1:25-cv-01760 (N.D. Ohio)
Issue: An Ohio law requires applicants to provide proof of citizenship before receiving a voter registration application at the Bureau of Motor Vehicles.
RNC’s Role: Intervenor-Defendant
Status: The district court denied the RNC’s motion to intervene.
Pennsylvania
Baxter v. Philadelphia Board of Elections, No. 240902481 (Pa.)
Issue: Pennsylvania law requires mail-in ballots to be dated in order to be counted.
RNC’s Role: Intervenor-Defendant
Status: The lower court concluded that Pennsylvania’s date requirement violates the Free and Equal Elections Clause in the Pennsylvania Constitution. The RNC appealed, and the parties are now waiting on a decision.
Eakin v. Adams County Board of Elections, No. 1:22-cv-00340 (Pa.)
Issue: Pennsylvania law requires mail-in ballots to be dated in order to be counted.
RNC’s Role: Intervenor-Defendant
Status: The court of appeals affirmed the district court’s injunction of Pennsylvania’s mail-in ballot requirement, holding that it failed to satisfy a judicial balancing test. The Third Circuit denied the RNC’s petition for en banc review.
Center for Coalfield Justice v. Washington Board of Elections, No.28WAP2024 (Pa.)
Issue: The Washington County Board of Elections adopted a notice and cure policy and rejected mail in ballots with errors.
RNC’s Role: Intervenor-Defendant
Status: On September 26, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled that the Board cannot reject mail in ballots without notifying voters of the defect.
South Carolina
Public Interest Legal Foundation v. Knapp, No. 3:24-cv-1276-JFA (4th Cir.)
Issue: South Carolina refused to turn over the requested information about voter rolls under the NVRA because PILF was not a citizen of South Carolina.
RNC’s Role: Amicus
Status: The district court held that South Carolina was required to turn over the requested information because the NVRA’s open records provisions are not just limited to citizens of a specific state. South Carolina appealed, and the RNC filed an amicus brief in support of PILF. The Fourth Circuit heard oral argument in late October.
Texas
La Union del Pueblo Entero v. Abbott, No. SA-21-CV-00844-XR (5th Cir.)
Issue: Texas enacted SB1, which—among other things—increases protections for voters needing assistance, reinforces voter identification requirements, and prohibits vote harvesting.
RNC’s Role: Intervenor-Defendant
Status: The district court held that SB1’s vote harvesting ban is unconstitutional. The Fifth Circuit has stayed that order and scheduled oral argument for December 2.
Vermont
Morin v. Burlington, No.24-CV-02403 (Vt.)
Issue: The City of Burlington permits noncitizens to vote in local elections, including school board elections.
RNC’s Role: Plaintiff (through individually named plaintiffs)
Status : The RNC brought a similar lawsuit several years ago, but the Vermont Supreme Court determined that the Vermont Constitution does not prohibit all noncitizen voting in local elections but rather prohibits noncitizen voting in local elections that concern “statewide issues” as opposed to “municipal issues.” The present lawsuit builds on this decision, challenging the ability of noncitizens to vote in school board elections. The Vermont Supreme Court heard oral arguments on October 15.
Virginia
Republican Party of Virginia v. Campbell County Electoral Board, No. CL25001969-00 (Campell Cnty. Cir. Ct.)
Issue: Virginia law requires both major political parties to be represented among precinct election officials “as far as practicable.” Despite several requests to appoint the qualified and available Republicans, the Campbell County election officials left several precincts without any Republican election officers.
RNC’s Role: Support State and County GOP
Status: The complaint was filed on October 24. After the complaint was filed, Campbell County agreed to appoint the Republicans, and the court dismissed the complaint.
Wisconsin
Kormanik v. Wisconsin Elections Commission, No. 2022CV001395 (Wisc. Ct. App.)
Issue: Wisconsin law provides for the spoiling of ballots in limited circumstances, but the Wisconsin Elections Commission ordered clerks to destroy unspoiled ballots and give the voter a new ballot for any reason.
RNC’s Role: Intervenor-Defendant
Status: The lower court determined that the Commission’s interpretation violated state law. The DNC appealed, and the RNC recently filed a response brief. The appeal was submitted on the briefs.
Paid for by the Republican National Committee. 310 First Street S.E., Washington, D.C. 20003, 202-863-8500. www.GOP.com. Not authorized by any candidate or candidate’s committee.
The Election Law Updates are published weekly. I send the first-of-the-month report by email and post the other weekly reports directly on my Substack page under the Election Law Updates tab. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments at hegop@nvc.net or Heidi@sdgop.com.
Heidi Engelhart, South Dakota Republican National Committeewoman