Voters wait in line to cast their ballots on the first day of early in-person voting in one of the mountainous counties badly affected by Hurricane Helene, in Marion, North Carolina, U.S. October 17, 2024. REUTERS/Jonathan Drake/File Photo
U.S. States Issue Strong Warnings to Local Officials Ahead of 2024 Election
Several U.S. states are sending clear warnings to county and local officials who might seek to interfere with the 2024 presidential election or refuse to certify results. These states, many of which are key battlegrounds in the upcoming election, are enforcing stricter oversight and emphasizing potential legal consequences, including criminal charges and financial penalties, for failing to follow election procedures. These measures are intended to ensure a smooth election process amidst lingering concerns over claims of electoral fraud.
Increased Oversight in Battleground States
Top election and law enforcement officials in at least five of the seven critical battleground states—Arizona, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin—are addressing the issue with increased scrutiny. These officials have investigated, indicted, and even jailed those who have attempted to interfere with the electoral process or delay the certification of election results, which is a necessary but largely ceremonial step. In some cases, county officials have also been warned that failure to certify election results on time could result in financial consequences, such as having to cover the cost of unnecessary audits or recounts.
The oversight is a response to unfounded claims of voter fraud, which gained momentum following former President Donald Trump’s efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election. Election officials are now better equipped to handle cases of local officials overstepping their authority, a significant concern as Trump continues to assert that his 2020 defeat was due to fraud.
Legal Consequences in Pennsylvania
In Pennsylvania, the largest of the battleground states, state officials have already acted against a county official who attempted to block the use of drop boxes for mail-in ballots. Luzerne County Manager Romilda Crocamo, a Democrat, had halted the deployment of drop boxes, citing security concerns. However, Pennsylvania Attorney General Michelle Henry warned that only the county elections board had the authority to make such decisions. Crocamo faced potential misdemeanor charges, including fines and up to one year in prison, if she failed to comply with state law. Shortly after this warning, the county reversed its decision.
Henry, appointed by the state’s Democratic governor, has emphasized the state’s readiness to enforce election laws, stating that both criminal and civil actions would be used to maintain the integrity of the electoral process.
Wisconsin’s Investigation of Local Officials
In Wisconsin, the Justice Department is investigating Wausau Mayor Doug Diny for removing a drop box intended for mail-in ballots from outside City Hall. Diny, a conservative backed by Republicans, claimed the box was not secure, despite a July state Supreme Court ruling allowing drop boxes. Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul, a Democrat, has indicated that his office will enforce election laws, ensuring that officials comply with state statutes.
Michigan’s Legal Actions Against Election Interference
Michigan, another key battleground state, has seen felony charges brought against three assistant clerks in Macomb County, who allegedly allowed double voting in a primary election. Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel filed charges against these individuals, emphasizing the state’s commitment to preventing election violations. Additionally, the state has enacted stricter election laws post-2020 to address officials who refuse to certify election results.
In Delta County, two canvass board members initially voted against certifying a local recall election, citing doubts about the results. State officials quickly intervened, warning that failure to certify could lead to financial penalties for the county. The board ultimately certified the results, but both members later resigned.
Arizona’s Felony Charges for Election Delays
In Arizona, two Republican county supervisors, Tom Crosby and Peggy Judd, face felony election interference charges for delaying the certification of the 2022 election results. Despite multiple warnings, the supervisors expressed doubts about the accuracy of voting machines, resulting in their decision to delay the canvass. Both are scheduled to stand trial in January 2024, with possible sentences of up to two and a half years in prison.
Nevada’s Swift Action to Enforce Election Certification
In Nevada, state officials acted quickly when the Washoe County Board of Commissioners initially refused to certify a primary election recount. Nevada Secretary of State Francisco Aguilar sought a court order to compel the board to certify the results, warning that failure to do so could result in criminal penalties and forfeiture of office. The commission ultimately reversed its decision, avoiding legal action.
Colorado’s Lengthy Sentence for Election Tampering
One of the most severe examples of legal repercussions occurred in Colorado, where former Mesa County Clerk Tina Peters was sentenced to nine years in prison for illegally tampering with voting machines during the 2020 election. Peters, a Republican who promoted false claims about election fraud, was convicted of abusing her position to interfere with the electoral process. The presiding judge described her as a “charlatan” who betrayed her office and misled the public.
COMMENTS