Judicial Watch: Sues California to Stop Counting of Ballots Received after Election Day – Lawsuit Filed on Behalf of Congressman Darrell Issa
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a federal lawsuit against California on behalf of U.S. Rep. Darrell Issa to prevent state election officials from extending Election Day for seven days beyond the date established by federal law (Darrell Issa v. Shirley N. Weber, in her official capacity). California counts ballots received up to seven days after Election Day.
Judicial Watch argues that California’s election law violates federal law, which defines Election Day as “the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November of every even-numbered year.”
This lawsuit against California builds on an October 25, 2024, Judicial Watch landmark victory against Mississippi, in which the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit found counting ballots received after Election Day contrary to federal law.
The California lawsuit states:
Despite Congress’ unambiguous and longstanding statement regarding a single and uniform national Election Day, California modified and extended Election Day by allowing seven additional days after Election Day for receipt of vote-by-mail ballots.
The lawsuit alleges that ballots arriving after Election Day “change electoral outcomes in California:”
This change to electoral outcomes has been publicly acknowledged by the Office of Secretary of State. Defendant Weber’s predecessor issued a press release advising the public not to rely on initial results from Election night because late-arriving VBM [vote by mail] ballots and canvassing may mean the “outcomes of close contests may take days or weeks to settle.”
During the 2024 federal election, two of Plaintiff’s Republican colleagues in Congress lost their reelection campaigns due to late-arriving VBM [vote by mail] ballots.
Congresswoman Steel (45th Congressional District) and Congressman Duarte (13th Congressional District) were both leading in their respective races immediately after Election Day on November 5, 2024, but ultimately lost reelection due to late-arriving VBM [vote by mail] ballots.
California Governor Gavin Newsom recently said it was “right” to criticize the extended post-Election Day counting in his state, which he called “ridiculous.”
“I am grateful to have Judicial Watch’s support in this important lawsuit,” Rep. Issa said. “California voters need all the help they can get to ensure fair elections.”
“Federal law requires an Election Day – not an ‘Election Week,’” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said. “California’s counting of ballots that arrive a full seven days after Election Day is unlawful, encourages fraud, and undermines voter confidence in election outcomes.”
In an Illinois “Election Day” lawsuit Judicial Watch in November 2024 filed a petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Supreme Court challenging the decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in the case filed on behalf of Congressman Mike Bost and two presidential electors from Illinois to prevent state election officials from extending Election Day for 14 days beyond the date established by federal law.
Judicial Watch is a national leader in voting integrity and voting rights. As part of its work, Judicial Watch assembled a team of highly experienced voting rights attorneys who stopped discriminatory elections in Hawaii, and cleaned up voter rolls in California, Ohio, Indiana, and Kentucky, among other achievements.
In May 2024, Judicial Watch sued California under the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (NVRA) to force it to clean up its voter rolls. The lawsuit, filed on behalf of Judicial Watch and the Libertarian Party of California, asks the court to compel California to make “a reasonable effort to remove the registrations of ineligible registrants from the voter rolls” as required by federal law.
In February 2023, Los Angeles County confirmed the removal of 1,207,613 ineligible voters from its rolls since last year, under the terms of a settlement agreement in a federal lawsuit Judicial Watch filed in 2017.
###
TOP NEWS
