Swing State Officials Plan to Sue Counties Failing to Certify 2024 Results

Top election officials in key swing states are prepared to take legal action against local governments that refuse to certify the upcoming 2024 presidential election. This decisive stance comes amid concerns that such refusals could complicate efforts to challenge the election results, especially if former President Donald Trump does not emerge victorious.

Officials from Arizona, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin recently shared their views in interviews and at a public event at the University of Michigan. Their goal is to reassure the public that they will maintain the integrity and legitimacy of the electoral process.

“We would immediately take them to court to compel them to certify, and we’re confident — because of how clear the election law is in Pennsylvania — that the courts would expeditiously require the counties to certify their election results,” stated Pennsylvania Secretary of State Al Schmidt.

Since the 2020 election cycle, there have been numerous instances where county officials in battleground states, some crucial for securing an Electoral College majority for Vice President Kamala Harris, have either voted against or delayed the certification of election results. This resistance has happened at least three dozen times across various levels of elections, from presidential races to local school board recounts.

This trend has emerged as a tactic associated with Trump and his allies, who have aimed to contest the results of the 2020 election by obstructing Congress from certifying President Joe Biden’s victory. The fear now is that if local officials refuse to certify their counties’ results in 2024, they might be attempting to block Harris’ electoral votes from being dispatched to Congress altogether.

Although past instances of local votes against certification have not succeeded in overturning election outcomes, they have raised serious concerns among experts and observers regarding the impact of such actions as the presidential election certification process begins on November 6. However, top election officials insist they are ready for any potential issues.

Schmidt refers to his past experience dealing with similar situations, highlighting that Pennsylvania has already taken legal action against three counties during the 2022 primary to ensure certification of the election results. “Because we have dealt with that before, we will be prepared should it occur again,” he commented.

In Arizona, Lisa Marra, the state’s elections director, echoed these sentiments. She stated that the state would pursue legal action against any county that refuses to certify the election. “The state would sue to get them to canvass the election,” she explained. “If they refuse to canvass at that point, we’d go back to court, and the state could actually move forward without those results.”

Meagan Wolfe, the nonpartisan administrator for the Wisconsin Election Commission, did not specify the legal steps involved but expressed confidence in the ability to resolve certification issues swiftly if court intervention becomes necessary. “I feel very confident that if we were to have that kind of issue where we had to have a court intervene to mandate somebody to do their mandatory responsibilities, we’d be able to resolve that very quickly,” she said.

In Nevada, two state officials — the attorney general and secretary of state, both Democrats — recently took legal action against a county that refused to certify a local election. Nevada Attorney General Aaron Ford remarked that he would “never hesitate to join the secretary of state in protecting Nevada’s elections.”

Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger emphasized that it may not always be necessary to engage with counties that do not certify. However, he made it clear that the law and Constitution would ultimately be upheld. “At the end of the day, we will make sure that every county follows the law and follows the Constitution,” he asserted.

In Michigan, state law allows officials to intervene and certify an election in the event a county board of canvassers fails to do so. Jonathan Brater, the director of elections for Michigan, stated that while a vote against certification would not prevent an eventual certification, it could lead to wasted time and resources.

Karen Brinson Bell, the executive director of the North Carolina State Board of Elections, highlighted the obligation of county board members to certify elections unless actual misconduct is evidenced. She pointed out that in 2023, two members of the Surry County Board were removed for refusing to certify an election in protest of state election guidance, underscoring that mere disagreement is insufficient grounds for not certifying results.

As the 2024 election approaches, officials across the country are bracing for possible challenges to the certification process, ready to uphold election integrity at all costs.

Source: USA TODAY