The U.S. Supreme Court had to intervene in that fiasco because the election was so close the outcome actually depended on Florida. That’s clearly not the case this time, but the fact remains that the Sunshine State is an election disaster. As of late Thursday four major counties—Broward, Palm Beach, Duval and Miami-Dade—had not finished counting all ballots.

Early this morning, election supervisors in Broward and Miami-Dade announced that they finally completed the job late Thursday night after working around the clock for days. Judicial Watch was on the ground in Miami-Dade, Florida’s largest county, with 829 precincts and 1.2 million voters. Its voting website advertises that it’s “ELECTION READY” though there was little evidence of that this week.

Incredibly, Miami-Dade Supervisor of Elections Penelope Townsley had the audacity to insist at a press conference this week that her office “conducted a very good election.” After being pressed by a reporter, Townsley was forced to concede that she was “embarrassed” and “disappointed,” but refused to answer questions about the long lines and major delays at the polls that made national headlines. During early voting lines extended for blocks and frustrated voters waited hours to cast a ballot.   

Now, after the fact, Miami-Dade’s mayor is calling for an investigation. In the local newspaper he pledged to uncover what went wrong by forming a task force that will examine the scandal. Townsley, the beleaguered election supervisor, claims she’s waiting for the “after-action report” to determine what went wrong, assuring that “we will learn from those lessons.”

The scandal broke several weeks ago in south Florida’s Palm Beach County where the supervisor of elections set off a statewide probe after discovering questionable forms coming from Strategic Allied Consulting, an Arizona-based firm. The Republican National Committee (RNC) has paid Strategic Allied Consulting $3 million to register new voters in several states, according to news reports, and Florida’s GOP has doled out an additional $1.3 million.

Now the number of counties in Florida, a key battleground state, that have reported questionable voter registration forms connected to the consulting firm has grown to 10. The tainted forms include discrepancies in addresses, signatures and other identifying information. The scandal has led the RNC and several of its state chapters to fire Strategic Allied Consulting, which is under investigation by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement.

One of Florida’s largest newspapers went so far as to compare this to the rampant, nationwide voter registration fraud caused by the “community group” ACORN during the 2008 presidential election (read all about that in a Judicial Watch special report). “Remember all that talk from Republicans about voter fraud?  Well, it ain’t just for ACORN anymore,” the paper’s political reporter writes in a story published over the weekend. .   

Though any allegation of voter fraud is serious and must be thoroughly investigated by authorities, it seems a bit premature to compare this to the massive ACORN scandal that rocked the last presidential election. Seventy ACORN employees in 12 states have been convicted of voter registration fraud and a congressional report revealed that more than one-third of the 1.3 million registrants submitted by the group in the 2008 election cycle were invalid.

Whether the fraud is tied to Republicans or Democrats, Judicial Watch is monitoring this closely through its 2012 Election Integrity Project to assure that voter rolls are as clean as required by federal law. Through publicly available data, JW has already discovered that voter rolls in several states—including Mississippi, Iowa, Indiana, Missouri, Texas, Florida, Alabama, California and Colorado—contain the names of individuals who are not eligible to vote.

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and fights government corruption, announced today that it has filed an amicus curiae brief (Viviette Applewhite, et al. v. The Common Wealth of Pennsylvania, et al. (No. 71 Map 2012)) with the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania in support of Act 18, a Pennsylvania voter ID law which requires voters to produce a Pennsylvania driver’s license or another government-issued photo ID, such as a U.S. passport, military ID, or county/municipal employee ID when voting. Judicial Watch filed its brief on behalf of Pennsylvania Rep. Daryl Metcalfe, the driving force behind the legislation, and members of the Pennsylvania House of Representatives who supported the bill.  The brief was filed on September 6, 2012, and the court will hear arguments on the matter on September 13, 2012.

According to Judicial Watch’s brief, filed jointly with Pennsylvania attorney L. Theodore Hoppe Jr., the Pennsylvania voter ID law is consistent with the Pennsylvania Constitution:

“[Our] position is simple and straightforward. While the Pennsylvania Constitution requires elections to be free and equal, it does not provide the framework for how to secure this…In passing Act 18, the General Assembly did no more than exercise its sound discretion and create a commonsense regulatory scheme to secure free and equal elections. The General Assembly undoubtedly had such authority and used it accordingly…

…In using its authority, [the General Assembly] has not caused anyone to be disenfranchised. Nor has it changed the qualifications set forth in the Pennsylvania Constitution. Rather it has maintained and promoted free and equal elections. For these reasons, the Commonwealth Court correctly concluded that Act 18 should not be preliminarily enjoined.

Act 18 (formerly HB 934) requires the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation to provide valid identification at no cost. The law further allows an individual without identification to cast a “provisional” ballot that will be counted if the identity of the voter can be indisputably ascertained within six business days of the election. Pennsylvania Governor Tom Corbett signed the legislation into law on March 14, 2012.

On August 15, 2012, the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania ruled in favor of Act 18, prompting opponents of the election integrity measure to appeal the ruling to the state’s highest court: “At the end of the day…I do not have the luxury of deciding this issue based on my sympathy for the witnesses or my esteem for counsel,” said Judge Robert Simpson. “Rather, I must analyze the law, and apply it to the evidence of facial unconstitutionality brought forth in the courtroom, tested by our adversarial system.”

“The right to vote is one of the most fundamental rights of American citizenship,” said Pennsylvania State Representative Daryl Metcalfe. “Voter photo identification is a commonsense safeguard that will ensure that each legally cast vote is protected and not canceled out by the forces of corruption.”

“Judicial Watch is honored to join Rep. Metcalfe and his fellow Pennsylvania legislators to support Pennsylvania’s commonsense voter ID law,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “The citizens of Pennsylvania must have confidence in the integrity of the voting process on Election Day. Our entire system of democracy depends on it.”

Judicial Watch has been involved in supporting the Pennsylvania Voter ID law for some time. JW Attorney Michael Bekesha testified on March 21, 2011, before the State Government Committee of the Pennsylvania House of Representatives, that the bill was a good way for Pennsylvania “to ensure fair elections for its citizens.” On July 17, 2012, Judicial Watch filed an amicus curiae brief with the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania on behalf of Pennsylvania Rep. Daryl Metcalfe and 49 members of the Pennsylvania House of Representatives who supported the bill. Nearly half of the members who supported the bill were signed on to the Judicial Watch’s initial amicus.

The story, out of Florida, is almost unbelievable but JW has all the documentation to prove it. First here is a little background; in 2010 JW launched the Election Integrity Project precisely to pressure states and localities around the nation to clean up voter registration rolls pursuant to Section 8 of the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA).

The goal is simple, to ensure the integrity and legitimacy of the electoral process by removing from the eligible voter lists the names of people who have died or moved. Enacted in 1993, NVRA actually requires this so states and counties shouldn’t need a reminder from an independent, nonpartisan educational foundation like JW.

Never the less, JW obtained publicly available data that indicates voter rolls around the country—including key swing states—contain the names of individuals who are ineligible to vote. They include Mississippi, Iowa, Indiana, Missouri, Texas, Ohio, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Florida, Alabama, California, and Colorado.

JW found that there appear to be more individuals on voter registration lists in these states than there are individuals eligible to vote, including dead people. JW warned election officials with letters notifying them of the problem and reminding that they’re required by law to “maintain accurate lists of eligible voters for use in conducting elections.” JW further writes that it’s prepared to take legal action of the voter rolls aren’t cleaned up.

Florida Secretary of State Kurt Browning got his friendly reminder in February, specifically noting that the Sunshine State appears to be failing to remove from the eligible voter lists the names of people who have died or moved. This is crucial because election fraud was a significant concern during the 2008 and 2010 elections and voter registration fraud was rampant.

In comes the case of two South Carolina women—a mother and daughter—who continue receiving voter registration cards from the West Palm Beach, Florida Supervisor of Elections office long after leaving the state and registering to vote in another one. They moved to Greenville more than four years ago and have repeatedly notified Florida and West Palm Beach election officials. When they continued receiving voter cards and even absentee ballots they notified the Attorney General’s office and a special Florida voter fraud hotline.

JW has obtained copies of the Florida voter registration cards sent to the mother’s Greenville address as recently as this month. To protect the women’s privacy, we can’t provide them but the forms are legitimate and the story is truly inconceivable. “This is voter fraud to the max,” one of the frustrated citizens told JW. “After I finally got an email confirmation from the (Florida) state division of elections that my name had finally been removed from their list, I checked my mail box and there they were; two cards. One in my name and one in my daughter’s name. It’s truly bizarre and annoying.”

Voter Registration Rolls in 3 Ohio Counties Exceed 100% of Total Voting Population – Lawsuit Alleges State in Violation of National Voter Registration Act

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a lawsuit in partnership with True the Vote against election officials in the State of Ohio, alleging violations of the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA).  Specifically, the lawsuit alleges that Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted and Ohio election officials have failed to take reasonable steps to maintain clean voter registration lists as required by Section 8 of the NVRA (Judicial Watch and True the Vote v. Jon Husted in his official capacity as Secretary of State of the State of Ohio, Civil Action (No. 2:12-cv-00792))

On February 6, 2012, Judicial Watch sent a letter to Ohio Secretary Jon Husted notifying him that the State of Ohio was in violation of Section 8 of the NVRA and that, as the chief State election official in the State of Ohio, he is responsible for Ohio’s compliance with Section 8 of the NVRA.  Based upon an analysis of U.S. Census and other data, Judicial Watch found that the number of persons listed on voter registration rolls in three counties in the State of Ohio exceeded 100% of the total voting age population. (Judicial Watch also noted that 31 other Ohio counties contained registration rolls that contain between 90% and 100% of total voting age population.  Typically, only 71% of eligible voters register to vote.

On March 2, 2012, the Secretary, through his Chief Legal Counsel, responded to Judicial Watch’s February 6, 2012, letter indicating that Secretary Husted and his office “share your concerns about the accuracy of our voting lists.” The letter pointed to a directive issued on April 18, 2011, to remove ineligible voters from the list due to change of address, but failed to mention a single initiative undertaken to comply with the directive. Moreover, the response failed to reference a single initiative by the State of Ohio to removed deceased or otherwise ineligible voters from voting lists.

In the March 2, 2012, response, the Secretary asserted that the State of Ohio’s efforts to maintain accurate voter rolls “have been hampered . . . by the restrictions and seemingly inconsistent provisions of the NVRA” and noted that he had written a letter to U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder “to discuss possible solutions,” but had not received a response.

According to Judicial Watch’s lawsuit: “The March 2, 2012, response, the lack of any further response, and the failure to produce any additional documents regarding any other voter list maintenance programs or activities undertaken by the State of Ohio confirms that the State of Ohio has failed to satisfy its voter list maintenance obligations under Section 8 of the NVRA.”

Judicial Watch is asking the court to force the State of Ohio to manage its lists in a manner consistent with the NRVA.

“To date, we have been given no signal that voter rolls are being properly maintained across the state, which only further inhibits our ability to research more flagrant forms of fraud. If we can’t assure the public that even the most basic principles of federal election law are being upheld, faith in our voting system can become irrevocably shaken,” said True the Vote President Catherine Engelbrecht.

“Election officials in the State of Ohio are shirking their responsibility to maintain clean voter registration lists.  Dirty election rolls can lead to voter and election fraud. Ohio’s voting rolls are a mess and we hope a court will require that they be cleaned up prior to Election Day,” stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton

The new lawsuit details how poorly maintained voter registration lists are a nationwide problem: “According to research conducted by the Center for the States of the non-partisan Pew Charitable Trusts (Pew) inaccurate voter registrations are rampant.  Pew’s independent research published in February 2012 indicates that approximately 24 million active voter registrations throughout the United States – or one out of every eight registrations – are either no longer valid or are significantly inaccurate.”

According to a Judicial Watch investigation, voter rolls in the following states appear to contain the names of individuals who are ineligible to vote: Mississippi, Iowa, Indiana, Missouri, Texas, Ohio, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Florida, Alabama, California, and Colorado. As part of its 2012 Election Integrity Project, Judicial Watch has put these states on notice that they must clean up their voter registration lists or face Judicial Watch lawsuits.  Judicial Watch filed a separate lawsuit against the State of Indiana related to its dirty voter registration lists as well.

Judicial Watch is partnering with True the Vote and the Election Law Center’s J. Christian Adams, who previously served in the voting rights section of the Department of Justice (DOJ), on a nationwide campaign to ensure the integrity of the 2012 elections. The groups are also represented in Ohio by the law firm Langdon Law LLC.

Judicial Watch has also uncovered documents showing that the Obama DOJ has also been partnering with the ACORN-connected Project Vote – President Obama’s former employer – to use the NVRA in order to  increase voter registrations for those on public assistance, which is a key Obama voter demographic, while ignoring a stipulation in the NVRA that requires states to keep voter registration lists clean. The DOJ has also filed lawsuits against states that attempt to enforce Voter ID laws and other measures

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch today released a statement reacting to the ruling of Judge Robert Simpson of the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court preserving Pennsylvania House Bill 934, a new law which requires voters to produce a Pennsylvania driver’s license or another government-issued photo ID, such as a U.S. passport, military ID, or county/municipal employee ID when voting.

“This ruling supports a commonsense law that safeguards legitimately cast votes from nullification by fraudulently cast votes,” said Pennsylvania State Representative Daryl Metcalfe. “Implementation of HB 934 will restore integrity to Pennsylvania’s election process, because one fraudulently cast vote is one too many.”

“It was rewarding to see that the Court’s decision incorporated much of the argument provided by Judicial Watch’s amicus brief.  This voter ID law will increase confidence in the integrity of our elections.  Be assured that we are prepared to defend this law before the Pennsylvania Supreme Court if need be,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.

On July 17, 2012, Judicial Watch filed an amicus curiae brief with the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania. on behalf of Pennsylvania Rep. Daryl Metcalf and 49 members of the Pennsylvania House of Representatives who supported the bill.  Rep. Metcalf was the author of and driving force behind the bill. Nearly half of the members who supported the bill are signed on to the Judicial Watch amicus. (Judicial Watch jointly filed its brief with Pennsylvania attorney L. Theodore Hoppe Jr.)

According to Judicial Watch’s amicus curiae brief:

In passing HB 934, the legislature did no more than exercise its sound discretion and create a commonsense regulatory scheme to secure free and equal elections. The legislature undoubtedly had such authority and used it accordingly.

In addition, because the legislature has the discretion to enact laws regulating elections, the courts must not overturn the policy choices of the legislative branch unless the legislature acts with gross abuse…In using its authority [the legislature] has not caused anyone to be disenfranchised, it has maintained and promoted free and equal elections, and it has not expanded upon the qualifications set forth in the Pennsylvania Constitution.

Judicial Watch has been involved in supporting the Pennsylvania Voter ID law for some time. JW Attorney Michael Bekesha testified on March 21, 2011, before the State Government Committee of the Pennsylvania House of Representatives, that the bill was a good way for Pennsylvania “to ensure fair elections for its citizens.”

The law requires the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation to provide valid identification at no cost. The law further allows an individual without identification to cast a “provisional” ballot that will be counted if the identity of the voter can be indisputably ascertained within six business days of the election.

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and fights government corruption, announced today that it has filed a Motion for Intervention with its client True the Vote to defend the State of Florida’s efforts to clean up voter registration lists against an Obama administration lawsuit (The United States of America v. State of Florida and Ken Detzner (No. 4:12-cv-285)).

Florida initiated a systematic effort to remove ineligible voters from its voter registration lists after Judicial Watch filed a letter of inquiry with Florida election officials on February 6, 2012.

Judicial Watch alerted the State of Florida that failure to maintain clean voter registration lists violates Section 8 of the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA). In response to Florida’s efforts to comply with the NVRA, the Obama administration filed a lawsuit on June 12, 2012, asking a federal court to enjoin the state from continuing its purge of illegal voters.

According to Judicial Watch’s motion, filed jointly with Judicial Watch client True the Vote on June 26, 2012, with the United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida, Tallahassee Division:

[Judicial Watch and True the Vote] seek to enter this lawsuit in order to demonstrate that, not only are the State of Florida’s list maintenance activities valid, proper, and timely, but that they also are required under federal law.  Intervention will ensure that the organizational interests of Proposed Intervener True the Vote and the rights and interest of the members of Proposed Intervener Judicial Watch, Inc. are adequately protected and preserved.

As reported by The Associated Press, the State of Florida ordered the removal of 53,000 dead voters from its lists while identifying an additional 2,700 non-citizens registered to vote. Press reports suggest the number of non-citizen voters in the state could be as high as 180,000.

Judicial Watch’s actions in Florida are part of its 2012 Election Integrity Project. According to a comprehensive Judicial Watch investigation, in addition to Florida and Indiana, a number of other states also appear to have problems with inaccurate voter registration lists, including: Mississippi, Iowa, Missouri, Texas, Ohio, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Alabama, and California. Judicial Watch has put election officials on notice in these states that they must maintain accurate voter registration lists consistent with Section 8 of the NVRA or face litigation to enforce the federal law.

On June 11, 2012, Judicial Watch (along with co-plaintiff True the Vote) filed a federal lawsuit against the State of Indiana for failure to comply with voter list maintenance provisions of the NVRA.  J. Christian Adams, a former civil rights attorney with the Department of Justice, is of counsel to the groups on these legal actions.  The groups are also represented in Florida by the firm, Radey, Thomas, Yon & Clark.

“The Obama Justice Department is evidently hostile to the idea of clean and fair elections,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “It is shameful that the Justice Department is now in court trying to stop Florida from fulfilling its legal obligation to remove non-citizen, ineligible voters from the voting rolls.  We look forward to defending the voting rights of our supporters, the rule of law, and election integrity from an unprecedented attack from this politicized Justice Department.”

“According to polls, most Americans agree that Florida should be making efforts to ensure people who are not eligible to vote are kept off of the voter registration rolls. Not only is this common sense, it is what the law requires. It’s disappointing that the Justice Department is more interested in taking extreme legal positions than protecting the integrity of the 2012 elections,” said True the Vote President Catherine Engelbrecht.

A recent report by non-partisan Pew Charitable Trusts (Pew) published in February 2012 indicates that approximately 24 million active voter registrations in states across the country – or one out of every eight registrations – are either no longer valid or are significantly inaccurate.

Pursuant to FOIA requests filed with the DOJ on February 6, 2012, Judicial Watch seeks the following records:

Any and all records regarding, concerning or related to the Civil Rights Division’s denial of pre-clearance of Section 5 of South Carolina Act R54 (A27 H3003) pursuant to Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, 42 U.S.C. § 1973c.;

Any and all records of communication regarding, concerning or related to South Carolina Act R54 (A27 H3003) between any official or employee of the Civil Rights Division and any other individual or entity.

The DOJ acknowledged receipt of the request on February 16, 2012. By law, a response was due no later than March 29, 2012. However, to date the DOJ has failed to respond.

In May 2011, South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley signed R54 into law.

Under the Voting Rights Act (Section 5), some states, including South Carolina, must have changes to voting laws “pre-cleared” by the DOJ. On December 23, 2011, the Obama DOJ notified South Carolina that it was denying “preclearance” for Section 5 of the state’s election integrity law, claiming the provision would suppress minority voting. This was the first law of its type in 20 years to be denied “preclearance” by the DOJ.

On February 7, 2012, the State of South Carolina sued Attorney General Eric Holder to have a three-judge panel to declare R54 consistent with federal law (South Carolina v. Holder (No. 1:12-cv-0203))..

South Carolina counters in its lawsuit, that the new voter ID measures “are not a bar to voting but a temporary inconvenience no greater than the inconvenience inherent in voting itself.” South Carolina also argues that its law is similar to a law passed by the State of Indiana that was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2008.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and ACLU of South Carolina filed a motion to intervene in the lawsuit on February 24, 2012.

“There is no doubt the Obama Justice Department is acting as a legal front for the Obama campaign and leftist special interest groups. South Carolina’s photo ID provision is a lawful attempt to ensure the integrity of every vote. But the Justice Department has no interest in stopping voter fraud because this would interfere with the effort to re-elect Barack Obama by hook or by crook.  The secrecy we are fighting in court suggests that Holder’s agency has something to hide.  The American people have a right to know how why the Obama administration has such a distaste for clean elections.”

As part of its 2012 Election Integrity Campaign, Judicial Watch filed a FOIA lawsuit on June 1, 2012, against the Obama DOJ to obtain records detailing the agency’s communications with the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) regarding Pennsylvania House Bill 934, commonly referred to as Pennsylvania’s Voter ID law. The ACLU and allied organizations have filed a lawsuit to prevent the law, signed by Pennsylvania Governor Tom Corbett on March 14, 2012, from taking effect before the November elections.

Voter Registration Rolls in 12 Indiana Counties Exceed 100% of Total Voting-Age Population

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and fights government corruption, announced that it filed a lawsuit (Judicial Watch, et. al v. King, et. al (1:12-cv-00800)) in partnership with True the Vote against election officials in the State of Indiana alleging violations of the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA).  Specifically the lawsuit alleges that Indiana Secretary of State Connie Lawson and Indiana Elections Division Co-Directors J. Bradley King and Trent Deckard have failed to maintain clean voter registration lists and make records related to voter registration list maintenance available as required by Section 8 of the NVRA.  (Judicial Watch’s co-plaintiff, True the Vote, is a grassroots election integrity watchdog.)

According to the lawsuit filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division:

Plaintiffs seek declaratory and injunctive relief to compel Defendants’ compliance with Section 8 of the NVRA. Specifically, Defendants have violated Section 8 by failing to make a reasonable effort to conduct voter list maintenance programs in elections for Federal office and by failing to produce records related to those efforts, as required by Section 8.  Plaintiffs thus seek a declaration and an injunction requiring Defendants to conduct and execute voter list maintenance programs in a manner that is consistent with federal law and further requiring Defendants to produce records about its list maintenance efforts.

In 2006, the federal government sued election officials in Indiana and forced the state to take measures to comply with the voter list maintenance under the NVRA. However, the remedies enacted by the state under a consent decree proved to be temporary. Based upon Judicial Watch’s analysis of publicly available data for the November 2010 general election, the number of persons listed on voter registration rolls in 12 counties in the State of Indiana exceeds 100% of the total voting-age population in those counties.

On February 6, 2012, Judicial Watch notified election officials in Indiana that the state is in violation of the NVRA. The February 6, 2012, letter also requested that the State of Indiana make available for public inspection all records concerning “the implementation of programs and activities conducted for the purpose of ensuring the accuracy and currency” of official lists of eligible voters, per Section 8 of the NVRA.

The State of Indiana responded by issuing an order formally denying what they characterized as a “grievance or complaint,” without explanation. No records have been made available responsive to Judicial Watch’s request, also prompting the lawsuit.

A recent report by non-partisan Pew Charitable Trusts (Pew) found that inaccurate voter registrations are rampant.  Pew’s independent research published in February 2012 indicates that approximately 24 million active voter registrations throughout the United States – or one out of every eight registrations – are either no longer valid or are significantly inaccurate.

According to a Judicial Watch investigation voter rolls in the following states appear to contain the names of individuals who are ineligible to vote: Mississippi, Iowa, Indiana, Missouri, Texas, Ohio, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Florida, Alabama, and California. As part of its 2012 Election Integrity Project, Judicial Watch has put these states on notice that they must clean up their voter registration lists or face Judicial Watch lawsuits.

The Obama Justice Department has failed to enforce Section 8 the NVRA in court, having last filed a lawsuit to enforce voter list maintenance requirements of the NVRA in 2007.  The current DOJ it is now opposing Florida’s Section 8 efforts to remove non-citizens from the voting rolls.

“Indiana’s election officials are shirking their responsibility to maintain clean voter registration lists. The citizens of Indiana should be outraged by the indifferent attitude their election officials have taken with respect to the National Voter Registration Act and to clean elections,” stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.  “This is our first lawsuit.  We plan to sue other states who failed to take reasonable steps to remove dead and ineligible voters from the rolls.”

“This lawsuit is a historic step in restoring integrity to the American system of electing its leaders,” stated True the Vote President Catherine Engelbrecht. “Dirty election rolls can lead to election fraud and stolen elections.”

Judicial Watch uncovered documents showing that the Obama DOJ is partnering with the ACORN-connected Project Vote, President Obama’s former employer, to use the NVRA to increase voter registrations for those on public assistance, which is a key Obama voter demographic, while ignoring NVRA’s Section 8 requirements for states to keep voter registration lists clean. The Justice Department has also filed lawsuits against states over voter ID laws and other measures intended to foster election integrity.

Judicial Watch is partnering with the Election Law Center’s J. Christian Adams, who previously served in the voting rights section of the Department of Justice, on its nationwide campaign to ensure the integrity of the 2012 elections.

The alarming figures were published this week in a report issued by the non-partisan Pew Center on States. It reveals that approximately 24 million active voter registrations in the United States are no longer valid or have significant inaccuracies. The problem, apparently, is an outdated registration system that can’t properly maintain records.

While this madness goes on, the Obama Administration is spending resources to legally challenging state voter identification laws—similar to one already upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court—that could help fix the crisis. More than a dozen states have passed measures requiring voters to show government-issued photo identification at the polls and the Obama Department of Justice (DOJ) has launched a campaign to challenge them all, asserting that they’re discriminatory because many minorities are too poor or too ignorant to get a valid ID.

Last month Texas struck back, suing the DOJ in federal court for blocking the implementation of a state voter ID law passed by the legislature in 2011 to deter and detect election fraud. Under the Federal Voting Rights Act, the DOJ must approve changes to election laws in certain states and Texas is among them. The Texas Secretary of State’s Office has been waiting for the DOJ preclearance since last July, but the feds continue stalling, essentially blocking the law’s implementation.

Preserving the integrity of the election process has been a huge issue for Judicial Watch over the years. Just last week JW launched the 2012 Election Integrity Project to pressure states and localities to clean up voter registration polls in order to comply with Section 8 of the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA). A lengthy JW investigation of public records indicates that voter rolls in numerous states have more registered voters than voting-age population.

Among the states that appear to contain names of individuals who are ineligible to vote are Florida, California, Texas, Colorado, Ohio, Mississippi, Iowa, Indiana and West Virginia, Pennsylvania and Missouri. This month JW sent warning letters to election officials in Indiana and Ohio as well as letters of inquiry to Florida and California officials as part of the probe into their problematic voting lists.