By Alethia Kasben and Zach Gorchow
Gongwer News Service
The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Tuesday agreed with a lower court in dismissing a suit against Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson claiming the state wasn't doing enough to keep the Qualified Voter File current.
Public Interest Legal Foundation, Inc. v. Benson (Docket No. 24-1255) claimed Benson failed to comply with the National Voter Registration Act.
A unanimous 6th Circuit panel consisting of Judge Eric Clay, Judge Helene White and Judge Stephanie Dawkins Davis affirmed the lower court's dismissal of the case.
Benson praised the decision in a statement.
"Michigan has done more in the last six years to improve the accuracy of our voter rolls than was done in the previous two decades," she said in a statement. "I'm very grateful that a federal court has once again recognized our strong work keeping our voter file up to date. Since 2020, our department has fought a record number of lawsuits based on false and meritless claims meant to undermine people's faith in Michigan's elections. Today's ruling is yet another victory for evidence, facts, and the law."
Overall, the ruling detailed the process by which the Department of State maintains the QVF and said it constitutes a "reasonable effort," as required under the NVRA.
"From 2019 to March 2023, Michigan cancelled between 400,000 and 450,000 registrations because the voters were deceased," the ruling says. "Michigan is consistently among the most active states in cancelling the registrations of deceased individuals; despite the fact that Michigan ranks 10th in voting-age population, the U.S. Election Assistance Commission reported that Michigan removed the sixth largest total number of registrations based on death in the 2016 election cycle; the fourth most in the 2018 cycle; the fifth most in the 2020 cycle; and the fifth most in the 2022 cycle."
That ruling came days after Benson prevailed at the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan in another case brought by Republican-affiliated organizations contesting her management of the state's voter list and other election systems.
In 2024, United Sovereign Americans brought lawsuits leading up to the election in several key states challenging the accuracy of their voter lists. They filed United Sovereign Americans v. Benson (USEDM Case No. 24-12256).
Using data they said they collected from the 2022 general election in Michigan, United Sovereign Americans argued the state's list of eligible registered voters was inaccurate, that ineligible voters were casting ballots in alarming numbers, the state's voting data collection measures were unreliable and the state's voting system error rates exceed acceptable federal thresholds.
The organization and several individual voters sought a ruling declaring that the 2022 general election suffered from hundreds of apparent errors, ordering Benson to "ministerially correct" the 2022 general election data errors and take remedial actions so they do not recur and bar state officials from certifying the 2024 election results until the state demonstrates the election comported with federal laws.
The lawsuit asked the court to order several other actions.
But Judge Robert White dismissed the case, ruling none of the plaintiffs had standing to bring the case.
A plaintiff's first requirement to show standing is to demonstrate they suffered a particular harm greater than the general population. The argument that the state's allegedly inaccurate voter list diluted the plaintiffs' right to vote falls because that is an alleged harm befalling all voters, not just them, White said.
"Petitioners cannot plausibly establish redressability either, i.e., the third Article III standing prong," he wrote. "Assuming they could somehow demonstrate that the diluted votes resulted in a concrete and particularize harm to the individual petitioners, a decision in their favor could never redress that injury. That's because any past elections already occurred – they are 'certified and final.'"
Gongwer News Service
The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Tuesday agreed with a lower court in dismissing a suit against Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson claiming the state wasn't doing enough to keep the Qualified Voter File current.
Public Interest Legal Foundation, Inc. v. Benson (Docket No. 24-1255) claimed Benson failed to comply with the National Voter Registration Act.
A unanimous 6th Circuit panel consisting of Judge Eric Clay, Judge Helene White and Judge Stephanie Dawkins Davis affirmed the lower court's dismissal of the case.
Benson praised the decision in a statement.
"Michigan has done more in the last six years to improve the accuracy of our voter rolls than was done in the previous two decades," she said in a statement. "I'm very grateful that a federal court has once again recognized our strong work keeping our voter file up to date. Since 2020, our department has fought a record number of lawsuits based on false and meritless claims meant to undermine people's faith in Michigan's elections. Today's ruling is yet another victory for evidence, facts, and the law."
Overall, the ruling detailed the process by which the Department of State maintains the QVF and said it constitutes a "reasonable effort," as required under the NVRA.
"From 2019 to March 2023, Michigan cancelled between 400,000 and 450,000 registrations because the voters were deceased," the ruling says. "Michigan is consistently among the most active states in cancelling the registrations of deceased individuals; despite the fact that Michigan ranks 10th in voting-age population, the U.S. Election Assistance Commission reported that Michigan removed the sixth largest total number of registrations based on death in the 2016 election cycle; the fourth most in the 2018 cycle; the fifth most in the 2020 cycle; and the fifth most in the 2022 cycle."
That ruling came days after Benson prevailed at the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan in another case brought by Republican-affiliated organizations contesting her management of the state's voter list and other election systems.
In 2024, United Sovereign Americans brought lawsuits leading up to the election in several key states challenging the accuracy of their voter lists. They filed United Sovereign Americans v. Benson (USEDM Case No. 24-12256).
Using data they said they collected from the 2022 general election in Michigan, United Sovereign Americans argued the state's list of eligible registered voters was inaccurate, that ineligible voters were casting ballots in alarming numbers, the state's voting data collection measures were unreliable and the state's voting system error rates exceed acceptable federal thresholds.
The organization and several individual voters sought a ruling declaring that the 2022 general election suffered from hundreds of apparent errors, ordering Benson to "ministerially correct" the 2022 general election data errors and take remedial actions so they do not recur and bar state officials from certifying the 2024 election results until the state demonstrates the election comported with federal laws.
The lawsuit asked the court to order several other actions.
But Judge Robert White dismissed the case, ruling none of the plaintiffs had standing to bring the case.
A plaintiff's first requirement to show standing is to demonstrate they suffered a particular harm greater than the general population. The argument that the state's allegedly inaccurate voter list diluted the plaintiffs' right to vote falls because that is an alleged harm befalling all voters, not just them, White said.
"Petitioners cannot plausibly establish redressability either, i.e., the third Article III standing prong," he wrote. "Assuming they could somehow demonstrate that the diluted votes resulted in a concrete and particularize harm to the individual petitioners, a decision in their favor could never redress that injury. That's because any past elections already occurred – they are 'certified and final.'"
––––––––––––––––––––
Subscribe to the Legal News!
https://legalnews.com/Home/Subscription
Full access to public notices, articles, columns, archives, statistics, calendar and more
Day Pass Only $4.95!
One-County $80/year
Three-County & Full Pass also available
