Breaking news on RNC Movers and Shakers

View this email in your browser ([link removed])
------------------------------------------------------------


**
National News
------------------------------------------------------------
Today, I am excited to announce news of appointments and endorsements made by President Trump and provide you with updates from the Republican National Committee on Election Integrity, and more.

Thanks to the dedicated efforts of Republicans across the country and right here in Hawai'i, we are seeing a shift take place in our country. And we're just getting started.


------------------------------------------------------------


**
Trump Nominations
------------------------------------------------------------
I'm extremely happy to share that Harmeet Dhillon, Founder of Dhillon Law Group, Inc., CEO of the Center for American Liberty, and fellow my RNC Committeewoman representing California, has been nominated by President Trump to lead the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice. I was proud to second Harmeet's nomination for RNC Chair in 2023 and she has become a trusted friend. I know that she will impact the culture of the DOJ for the better and continue to fight for freedom and justice for all Americans.

- December 9, 2024 -

STATEMENT FROM PRESIDENT DONALD J. TRUMP

I am pleased to nominate Harmeet K. Dhillon as Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights at the U.S. Department of Justice. Throughout her career, Harmeet has stood up consistently to protect our cherished Civil Liberties, including taking on Big Tech for censoring our Free Speech, representing Christians who were prevented from praying together during COVID, and suing corporations who use woke policies to discriminate against their workers. Harmeet is one of the top Election lawyers in the Country, fighting to ensure that all, and ONLY, legal votes are counted. She is a graduate of Dartmouth College and the University of Virginia Law School, and clerked in the U.S. Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. Harmeet is a respected member of the Sikh religious community. In her new role at the DOJ, Harmeet will be a tireless defender of our Constitutional Rights, and will enforce our Civil Rights and Election Laws FAIRLY and FIRMLY.

Click image below for more on Harmeet's nomination from LifeNews

[link removed] /www.lifenews.com/2024/12/09/trump-names-pro-life-attorney-harmeet-dhillon-assistant-attorney-general-for-civil-rights/


------------------------------------------------------------

RNC Announcements
Lara Lea Trump announced in a post on X that she expects to step down from the Co-Chair role during the upcoming RNC Winter meeting in January. Click the image below to view her post.


[link removed]


------------------------------------------------------------

RNC Chair Michael Whatley emailed RNC members on December 8th, announcing his intention to run again for Chair of the committee. Chair Whatley email is below:

Dear members of the 168,

Just over a month ago, we helped secure one of the greatest political victories in our nation’s history. Since that night, we have seen President Trump assemble an incredible team of White House staff and cabinet nominees which will carry out his America First Agenda. In January, he will be sworn in as our 47th President and formally begin the work of Making America Great Again.

When you elected me as Chairman in March 2024, I laid out my vision for the RNC: getting out the vote, protecting the ballot, and raising the money we need to elect Republicans up and down the ticket. If I am lucky enough to once again earn your support, I will not deviate from that vision. Our efforts to get out the vote, protect the ballot, and raise money over the past 9 months played a crucial role in helping re-elect President Trump, flip the Senate, and maintain our House majority. Together, we have shown that while the RNC cannot be all things to all people, it can – and should – be a lean, focused, operation which exists to elect Republican candidates.

None of our victories would have been possible without your dedicated efforts in all 56 states and territories. You drove our momentum from the grassroots up, made our election integrity effort possible, and supercharged your state networks to get voters to the polls for President Trump and our Republican Candidates up and down the ballot. Now we face crucial fights ahead, from supporting President Trump’s cabinet nominees and preparing for the 2026 midterms to our ongoing fight for election integrity across America. It is my hope that we can take on these challenges together and continue delivering victories for the President and his America-first agenda.

As you may have seen, President Trump has asked me to continue on as Chairman of the Republican National Committee. I am very grateful to the President for the trust he has placed in me to serve in this role, which has been the honor of a lifetime.

I am formally announcing that I am running for re-election as RNC Chairman and I am humbly asking for your vote. I promise that I will continue working nonstop to help President Trump Make America Great Again!

I look forward to seeing you all at our upcoming Winter Meeting and President Trump’s Inauguration. In the meantime, I hope that you and yours have a Merry Christmas and Happy Hanukkah.

- Michael


------------------------------------------------------------

Trump Endorsements

RNC Treasurer KC Crosbie receives President Trump's endorsement for RNC Co-Chair on December 9th.
I met KC four years ago, when I was a brand new Committeewoman and I immediately appreciated her Southern warmth and easy-going manner. She has served our party with grace and courage in the face of a challenging season. I couldn't be prouder to call her a friend.

Click the image below to see Trump's Endorsement of KC on Truth Social!

[link removed]




------------------------------------------------------------

Coming Up!

TURNING POINT ACTION - AMERICAFEST 2024

Many of you have heard me say that this organization is without equal. They turned out an unprecedented number of new voters for President Trump and chased hundreds of thousands of ballots in what was the most successful elections cycle for Republicans in decades!

Come see what the excitement is all about! Later this month, Turning Point Action will be hosting AMERICAFEST 2024 ([link removed]) in Phoenix Arizona and I encourage anyone who is able, to attend. It is like no other political, grassroots event in our country.

[link removed]
See below for more details and join the movement!

Turning Point’s annual event, AmericaFest ([link removed]) , will be held December 19-22, 2024, at the Phoenix Convention Center. Those who attend this one-of-a-kind, four-day event will hear from dozens of the nation’s top leaders, network with thousands of like-minded attendees and 100+ partnering organizations, and experience concerts featuring top artists in the country- all while celebrating the greatest country in the world, America. Following a Turning Point event, these attendees return to their campuses and communities more energized than ever.

This can’t-miss experience is an excellent opportunity to develop your leadership skills, enhance your activism techniques, receive training, and connect with resources and opportunities offered by Turning Point and its partner organizations.


------------------------------------------------------------

Election Integrity Updates

Below is a high-level summary of important pending litigation, including litigation in which the RNC is involved, and other election law news. Please feel free to reply with any comments or suggestions. If there is anyone else you would like to receive this update, please send us their contact information.

State Litigation Highlights

ARIZONA

American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona v. Richer, No. CV-24-0263-SA (Ariz.). On November 9, Plaintiffs filed this emergency petition seeking to extend the deadline by 96 hours for Arizona voters to cure their mail-in ballots for the 2024 general election. The RNC and Arizona GOP filed an amicus brief in opposition. On November 10, the Arizona Supreme Court denied Plaintiffs’ emergency petition.

Mi Familia Vota v. Fontes, No. 2:21-cv-01423-DWL (D. Ariz.) (“MFV I ”). Plaintiffs filed this lawsuit in August 2021 challenging SB 1485, which authorizes the removal of voters from the permanent early voting list if they do not vote an early ballot in two consecutive election cycles and fail to confirm that they want to continue receiving early ballots. The RNC and NRSC are intervenor-defendants. The court dismissed plaintiffs’ challenge to SB 1003, which requires voters who submit an early ballot without a signature to cure the deficiency by 7:00 pm on Election Day. The case is currently in discovery.

Mi Familia Vota v. Fontes, No. 2:22-cv-00509-SRB (D. Ariz.) (“MFV II”). These consolidated lawsuits challenge HB 2492, which requires individuals who register to vote using the National Voter Registration Form to provide proof of citizenship in order to vote in presidential elections or vote early by mail, and HB 2243, which requires county recorders to investigate and remove non-citizens from voter rolls. The RNC is an intervenor-defendant. On September 14, 2023, the court granted summary judgment for plaintiffs on several claims, including their claim that the NVRA preempts the proof-of-citizenship requirement. Trial on the remaining claims finished on November 6, 2023. On February 29, the judge issued a decision invalidating several provisions of the law, including the requirement that voters provide their birthplace on voter registration forms, the requirement to provide documentary proof of residence, and the requirement to conduct certain investigations of voters who officials have
“reason to believe” are non-citizens. At the same time, the court upheld provisions requiring investigation of voters who do not provide documentary proof-of-citizenship and authorizing cancellation of confirmed non-citizens’ voter registrations.

On May 17, the RNC and Arizona Legislature filed a motion to stay the district court’s order pending appeal with respect to the documentary proof of citizenship requirements. On June 27, the RNC and Arizona Legislature filed an emergency motion for partial stay pending appeal in the Ninth Circuit. On July 18, the court granted ([link removed]) in part and denied in part the motion for partial stay of the judgment. The court held election officials may reject state-form applications that lack documentary proof of citizenship. The court granted expedited merits briefing. On August 8, the RNC and Arizona Legislature filed ([link removed]) an emergency application for a stay in the U.S. Supreme Court.

On August 22, the U.S. Supreme Court granted ([link removed]) in part and denied in part the emergency stay application. The Supreme Court held that Arizona may reject state-form voter registration applications that lack documentary proof of citizenship rather than registering applicants as federal-only voters. The Court denied the stay request with respect to proof of citizenship requests for voting by mail or in presidential elections, but those claims remain pending in the Ninth Circuit. On August 26, the RNC and Arizona Legislature filed their third brief in the Ninth Circuit. Oral argument occurred on September 10.

RNC v. Fontes , No. CV2024-050553 (Maricopa Cnty. Superior Ct.). On February 9, 2024, the RNC, Arizona GOP, and Yavapai County GOP filed a lawsuit challenging the lawfulness of the 2023 Election Procedures Manual (“EPM”). Plaintiffs maintain that Secretary Fontes failed to follow required notice-and-comment procedures when promulgating the EPM, including by imposing an unlawfully short 15-day period for public input. Plaintiffs also challenge numerous provisions of the EPM as inconsistent with state law, including EPM provisions that weaken safeguards against non-citizen voting and that restrict the ability to challenge early ballots. On February 14, Plaintiffs filed a motion for a preliminary injunction. On March 18, Secretary Fontes and intervenor-defendants filed motions to dismiss the case and oppositions to our motion for a preliminary injunction. On April 8, Plaintiffs filed a consolidated reply in support of their motion for preliminary injunction and a response in opposition to
defendants’ motions to dismiss. Oral argument on the motions took place on May 3. On May 14, the judge granted the motion to dismiss. On June 11, Plaintiffs moved for entry of final judgment. On July 3, Plaintiffs appealed the trial court’s dismissal. On August 21, Plaintiffs filed their opening brief on appeal. On September 30, Defendant Fontes and Intervenor-Defendants filed their responses to Plaintiffs’ opening brief on appeal. On October 17, Plaintiffs filed ([link removed]) their reply brief. On October 28, the Court of Appeals denied Plaintiffs’ request for preliminary injunctive relief. Update: Oral argument is scheduled to occur on December 10.

Petersen v. Fontes, No. CV2024-001942 (Maricopa Cnty. Superior Ct.). On January 31, Senate President Warren Petersen and Speaker of the House Ben Toma filed suit challenging provisions of the EPM, including provisions that weaken protections against non-citizen voting and delay the start of reforms to the state’s active early voter list. The plaintiffs moved for a preliminary injunction the same day. A hearing occurred on May 23.

Arizona Free Enterprise Club v. Fontes, No. S-1300-CV-2023-00202 (Yavapai Cnty. Superior Ct.). The Arizona Free Enterprise Club, Restoring Trust and Integrity in Elections (RITE), and Arizona GOP filed a lawsuit against the Secretary of State for authorizing the use of signatures that do not appear in a voter’s registration record to conduct signature-matching. On September 1, 2023, the court denied the Secretary’s motion to dismiss. The parties cross-moved for summary judgment. Oral argument occurred on January 18, 2024. On April 25, the court granted summary judgment for the Secretary. On June 5, Plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal. On September 23, Plaintiffs filed their opening brief.

Arizona Free Enterprise Club v. Fontes, No. CV2024-002760 (Maricopa Cnty. Superior Ct.). On February 9, Plaintiffs, supported by America First Policy Institute, filed a challenge to provisions of the EPM, including provisions restricting the right to observe activities at drop boxes and polling places, for violation of freedom of speech, freedom of association, and due process. On April 16, Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint. On May 28, Plaintiffs filed a motion for a preliminary injunction. On August 6, the court partially granted Plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction. On August 13, Defendants filed a notice of appeal. On September 11, Defendants filed a motion for stay pending appeal. On September 27, the Arizona Court of Appeals partially granted Defendants’ motion for stay of the trial court’s decision.

FLORIDA

Florida Rising Together v. Byrd, No. 6:24-cv-01682 (M.D. Fla.). Several left-wing groups filed a lawsuit challenging a state law requiring information on voter registration applications to match the information in state and federal databases. On October 16, the RNC and the Republican Party of Florida filed ([link removed]) a motion to intervene to defend the law. On October 30, Plaintiffs filed a motion in opposition to the RNC and Republican Party of Florida’s motion to intervene.

Vote.org v. Byrd, No. 4:23-cv-00111-AW (N.D. Fla.). Plaintiffs challenge Florida’s law requiring wet signatures on voter registration applications under the Materiality Provision of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The RNC and Republican Party of Pasco County are intervenor-defendants. The United States has filed a statement of interest in the case. On October 30, the court granted Florida’s and the Republican Intervenors’ motions to dismiss for failure to state a claim. On November 9, the plaintiffs appealed to the Eleventh Circuit. Appellants filed their opening brief on January 25, 2024. The US Department of Justice submitted an amicus brief in support of appellants. On May 15, the RNC and the Republican Party of Pasco County filed their response brief. State Defendants also filed their response brief. On June 5, Plaintiffs-Appellants’ filed their reply brief.

GEORGIA
Ayota v. Fall, No. __ (Cobb Cnty. Super. Ct.). Update: On November 4, the Georgia Supreme Court issued emergency relief, prohibiting the county from accepting ballots after the deadline.

In re Georgia Senate Bill 202, No. 1:21-MI-55555-JPB (N.D. Ga.). This consolidated case consists of six lawsuits challenging SB 202, a Georgia election integrity law. The RNC, NRSC, NRCC, and Georgia GOP are intervenor-defendants. In August 2023, the district court preliminarily enjoined the law’s requirement that absentee voters include their birthdate on ballot envelopes and some of the prohibitions on providing food, drink, and gifts to voters in line at a polling place. The Intervenors and State of Georgia appealed those rulings on September 18, 2023, and that appeal remains pending. On July 1, Republican Intervenors and State of Georgia filed their opening briefs in the Eleventh Circuit. On October 30, Republican Intervenors and State of Georgia filed their reply ([link removed]) briefs
([link removed]) .

The court denied a motion to preliminarily enjoin the law’s ballot harvesting and drop box restrictions. On October 11, 2023, the district court denied the DOJ’s motion for a preliminary injunction, holding that DOJ was not likely to succeed on its claim that the legislature enacted SB 202 for racially discriminatory reasons. On January 12, 2024, the court denied plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction claiming that SB 202’s runoff provisions are racially discriminatory.

On October 30, 2023, the Republican Intervenors and State of Georgia filed motions for summary judgment, which are pending. On May 14, 2024, the parties and Republican Intervenors filed replies in support of their motions for summary judgment. On August 23, the district court denied the motion for expedited summary judgment, holding the court lacked jurisdiction over the issue while an appeal is pending.

VoteAmerica v. Raffensperger, No. 1:21-CV-1390-JPB (N.D. Ga.). Plaintiffs in this unconsolidated case challenge certain provisions of SB 202, including its prohibitions on pre-filled absentee ballot applications sending applications to voters who already applied for an absentee ballot and its requirement that absentee ballot applications provided by third parties include disclaimers. The RNC, NRSC, NRCC, and Georgia GOP are intervenor-defendants. On September 27, 2023, the court granted summary judgment for the state on several claims and allowed one claim to proceed to trial. On April 3, intervenor-defendants and defendants filed pre-trial briefs. A bench trial was held from April 15-18. On May 31, intervenor-defendants and defendants filed post-trial briefs. On July 19, the court ordered additional briefing from the parties on the issue of standing.

Vote.org v. Georgia State Election Board, No. 1:22-CV-01734-JPB (N.D. Ga.). Plaintiffs challenge Georgia’s law requiring a wet signature on absentee ballot applications. The RNC and Georgia GOP are intervenor-defendants. The state’s motion to dismiss was denied in March 2023. Summary judgment motions are pending. On April 11, the RNC and Georgia GOP filed a response in opposition to plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment. On April 18, the United States Department of Justice filed a statement of interest in the case.

Coalition for Good Governance v. Raffensperger, No. 1:21-CV-02070-JPB (N.D. Ga.). Plaintiffs in this unconsolidated case challenge certain provisions of SB 202, including the provision authorizing the State Election Board to temporarily suspend election superintendents who commit multiple violations of election law over multiple cycles. The RNC, NRSC, NRCC, and Georgia GOP are intervenor-defendants. The state’s motion for summary judgment is pending. Oral argument on the motion for summary judgment occurred on July 2.

IATSE Local 927 v. Mashburn, No. 1:23-cv-04929-LMM (N.D. Ga.). Plaintiff challenges Georgia’s requirement that absentee ballot applications be received 11 days before the election, arguing that federal law requires a 7-day deadline for presidential elections. On January 12, the RNC and Georgia GOP filed a motion to intervene and a proposed motion to dismiss. On January 29, the plaintiff amended its complaint in response to the RNC’s proposed motion to dismiss, which highlighted the complaint’s legal deficiencies. On February 9, the RNC and Georgia GOP filed a reply in support of their motion to intervene and a proposed motion to dismiss the amended complaint. On April 30, Plaintiff filed a motion for preliminary injunction. On May 4, the RNC and Georgia GOP were granted intervention. On June 7, granted the state defendants’ motion to dismiss. On July 8, the United States filed a notice of intervention in the case. denied Plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction. The 11-day ballot
application deadline will therefore be in effect for the 2024 general election. Update: On November 15, the court ordered additional briefing from the plaintiffs on the issue of standing.

New Georgia Project v. Raffensperger, No. 1:24-cv-03412 (N.D. Ga.). Plaintiffs challenge SB 189, which expands the rights of citizens to challenge the eligibility of voters and requires registered voters with no fixed address to received election mail at local clerks’ offices. On August 16, the RNC and Georgia GOP filed a motion to intervene as defendants. Update: On November 5, the court consolidated this case and Georgia State Conference of the NAACP v. Raffensperger. On November 20, State Defendants’ filed a motion to dismiss.

IOWA

League of United Latin American Citizens of Iowa v. Pate, No. 05771 CVCV061476 (Polk Cnty. Dist. Ct.). Plaintiffs challenge provisions of SF 413 and SF 568, including provisions banning absentee ballot harvesting and drop boxes. The RNC, NRSC, NRCC, and Iowa GOP are intervenor-defendants. The trial date has been postponed while the Iowa Supreme Court resolved a dispute concerning discovery sought from non-party Iowa legislators. On February 23, 2024, the Iowa Supreme Court upheld the legislators’ claims of legislative privilege with respect to the discovery sought. The RNC filed an amicus brief in the Supreme Court. The case returned to the trial court.
       
MICHIGAN

Michigan Republican Party v. Benson II, No. 24-000165 (Mich. Ct. Cl.). filed ([link removed]) this lawsuit challenging Secretary Benson’s unlawful guidance that purports to allow overseas citizens who never resided in Michigan to cast ballots in Michigan elections. These individuals are not eligible to vote under the Michigan Constitution, and the federal UOCAVA statute does not extend eligibility to such individuals. On October 17, there was a hearing on the parties’ cross-motions for summary disposition. granted ([link removed]) the defendants’ motion for summary disposition. Plaintiffs have appealed.

RNC v. Benson, No. 24-000148 (Mich. Ct. Cl.). filed ([link removed]) this lawsuit against Secretary Benson for disregarding state law requiring serial numbers on absentee ballots to match the serial numbers on ballot envelopes and in poll books. This requirement ensures that the person returning the ballot was the person who was issued the ballot. State law requires ballots with mismatching numbers to be rejected, and the voter given the opportunity to cure the issue, while Benson’s guidance directs clerks to count such ballots. A hearing was held on September 26. granted ([link removed]) Plaintiffs’ motion, ordering Defendant to revise her guidance to require clerks to verify that the serial number on the ballot matches
the serial number on the envelope. The court noted that Defendant’s counsel conceded at the hearing that mismatched serial numbers could be the result of voter fraud. The case otherwise remains pending.

RNC v. City of Detroit Department of Elections, No. 24-015223-CZ (Wayne Cnty. Cir. Ct.). On October 15, the RNC filed ([link removed]) a lawsuit against the City of Detroit Department of Elections for deleting video surveillance footage of an absentee ballot drop box that was the subject of a pending FOIA request.

RNC v. Benson, No. 1:24-cv-00262 (W.D. Mich.). On March 13, the RNC and two Republican voters filed a lawsuit ([link removed]) challenging Secretary Benson's inadequate voter roll maintenance procedures under Section 8 of the National Voter Registration Act. The RNC initiated this action after discovering that 53 of the state’s 83 counties have more active registered voters than adult citizens and that 23 additional counties have unusually high registration rates exceeding 90%. On March 22, Detroit Disability Power and Michigan Alliance for Retired Americans filed a motion to intervene. On April 4, the League of Women Voters of Michigan filed a motion to intervene. On April 5, Plaintiffs filed a response in opposition to DDP’s and MARA’s motion to intervene. On April 15, Defendants filed a motion to dismiss. On April 19, Plaintiffs filed a response in
opposition to the League of Women Voters of Michigan’s motion to intervene.filed a reply in support of their motion to dismiss. On October 22, the court granted ([link removed]) the defendants’ motion to dismiss. Update: On November 8, RNC filed a notice of appeal.

Michigan Republican Party v. Donahue, No. 22-118123-AW (Genesee The RNC and Michigan GOP filed suit after the City of Flint failed to hire an equal number of Republican and Democrat poll workers for the November 2022 election. The court dismissed the lawsuit for lack of standing, and Plaintiffs appealed to the Michigan Court of Appeals. On March 7, the Michigan Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal. On April 18, Plaintiffs filed an application for leave to appeal with the Michigan Supreme Court. On June 6, Plaintiffs filed a reply in support of their application for leave to appeal. Update: On December 2, the Michigan Supreme Court accepted the case and ordered briefing and argument.

MINNESOTA

Minnesota Alliance for Retired Americans v. Simon, No. 62-cv-24-854 (Ramsey Cnty. Dist. Ct.). Plaintiffs filed this lawsuit challenging the state’s absentee ballot witness requirement under the Materiality Provision of the Civil Rights Act. On March 15, the RNC and Minnesota GOP filed a notice of intervention to defend the law. On May 2, Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint and a motion for a temporary injunction. On May 9, the RNC and Minnesota GOP filed a proposed response in opposition to Plaintiffs’ motion for temporary injunction. On June 14, the court issued an order denying plaintiff’s motion for a temporary injunction, denying defendant’s motion to dismiss, and denying the Republican intervenors’ motion to intervene. On July 15, the Secretary of State filed a petition for discretionary and expedited appeal of the court’s June 14 decision denying his motion to dismiss in the Minnesota Court of Appeals. On July 22, Republican Intervenors filed a notice of appeal of their denial to
intervene and Plaintiffs filed a response in opposition to the petition. On August 13, the Minnesota Court of Appeals granted Defendants’ petition for discretionary review.filed their opening brief appealing their denial to intervene. On September 12, Secretary Simon filed his opening brief for his appeal of the trial court’s order denying his motion to dismiss. filed ([link removed]) as amici in support of Defendant-Appellant. Update: Oral argument for both cases is scheduled for January 16.

MISSISSIPPI  

RNC v. Wetzel, No. 1:24-cv-25 (S.D. Miss.). The RNC, Mississippi Republican Party, and two individual plaintiffs filed a lawsuit ([link removed]) on January 26, 2024, which asserts that Mississippi’s post-Election Day absentee ballot receipt deadline violates federal law. The federal Election Day statute requires federal elections to occur on the Tuesday after the first Monday in November. This lawsuit will implicate the laws of seventeen states that count ballots that are received after Election Day. On March 5, the court entered a briefing schedule for cross-motions for summary judgment, which will conclude briefing by April 16. On March 26, the parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment. You can view the RNC’s motion here
([link removed]) . On April 9, Defendant Secretary of State filed a response in opposition to the RNC’s motion for summary judgment. The RNC also filed a response opposing defendants’ cross-motions for summary judgment. On April 11, On April 16, Plaintiffs filed a reply in support of their cross motion for summary judgment. A hearing on the motions occurred on July 9. granted summary judgment for defendants. The court held that plaintiffs had standing to bring the claim but rejected the claim that the federal Election Day statute precludes counting ballots received after Election Day. On August 2, the RNC and other plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal. On August 6, the RNC filed a motion to expedite, which the Fifth Circuit granted on August 9. On August 16, the RNC filed its opening brief in the Fifth Circuit. filed its reply brief. Oral argument occurred
on September 24. reversed ([link removed]) the district court’s decision, holding that federal law prohibits counting ballots received after Election Day in federal elections. Update: On November 8, the intervenor-defendants filed a petition for the Fifth Circuit to rehear the case en banc. On December 2, the RNC filed a response ([link removed]) opposing the petition.

NEVADA

Dagusen v. Aguilar, No. 24-0C-001531B (Nev. Dist. Ct. Carson City). On September 11, the RNC, Trump Campaign, and the Nevada Republican Party filed ([link removed]) a lawsuit against Nevada Secretary of State Aguilar for failure to verify citizenship of registered voters. The RNC brought this lawsuit after discovering evidence of thousands of non-citizens on Nevada’s voter rolls who are at risk of casting ballots this November, which would result in unconstitutional dilution of citizens’ voting power. The complaint asks the court to compel the Secretary to conduct citizenship verification before the presidential election. On October 3, the DNC and Nevada Democratic Party filed a motion to dismiss. On October 28, Plaintiffs filed
([link removed]) a motion in opposition to Defendants’ motion to dismiss. Update: On November 4, the DNC and NV Democratic Party filed a reply in support of their motion to dismiss. On December 2, the state filed a motion to dismiss.

RNC v. Aguilar, No. 2:24-cv-00518 (D. Nev.). On March 18, the RNC and Nevada Republican Party filed a lawsuit ([link removed]) challenging Secretary of State Cisco Aguilar’s inadequate voter list maintenance practices under Section 8 of the National Voter Registration Act. Three counties in Nevada have more active registered voters than voting-eligible adults, and two counties have implausibly high registration rates exceeding 90%. On June 18, the court granted the state’s motion to dismiss on redressability grounds but granted plaintiffs leave to amend their complaint. On July 2, Plaintiffs filed ([link removed]) their amended complaint. granted
([link removed]) Defendants’ motions to dismiss on standing grounds but gave Plaintiffs the opportunity to file a motion to amend the complaint to plead additional facts. Update: On November 11, Plaintiffs filed a motion to amend their complaint, which the court granted.

RNC v. Burgess, No. 3:24-cv-00198 (D. Nev.). On May 3, the RNC, Trump Campaign, and the Nevada Republican Party filed ([link removed]) a lawsuit challenging Nevada’s post-Election Day ballot receipt deadline. Nevada counts mail ballots received up to four days after Election Day. This is inconsistent with the federal Election Day statute, because it unlawfully extends the day of the election past the date that Congress prescribed. On July 17, the court granted the state’s motion to dismiss for lack of standing. On August 16, Plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal to the Ninth Circuit. Update: On November 20, Plaintiff-Appellants filed ([link removed]) their opening brief.

NEW HAMPSHIRE

New Hampshire Youth Movement v. Scanlan, No. 1:24-cv-00291 (D.N.H.). Plaintiffs are challenging New Hampshire’s new proof-of-citizenship law. The RNC’s motion to intervene is pending.

DNC v. Scanlan, No. 226-2023-CV-00613 (Hillsborough Superior Ct.). After the court dismissed the complaint in 603 Forward on standing grounds, the DNC and New Hampshire Democratic Party brought another suit challenging SB 418. Plaintiffs claim that SB 418 violates a state constitutional provision requiring election results to be sent to the secretary of state within five days of the election (Count I) and violates procedural due process (Count II). The RNC and NH Republican State Committee, supported by RITE, intervened. On April 17, the court issued a decision granting RNC’s motion to dismiss with respect to Count I and denying the plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction. Plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed Count II and on April 30 filed a notice of appeal of the dismissal of Count I. Plaintiffs sought an expedited appeal. On May 9, the New Hampshire Supreme Court denied Plaintiffs’ motion for an expedited appeal. On October 3, Republican Intervenors filed a supplemental memorandum of
law. On October 8, the court stayed the appeal until after the election.

NEW YORK

Fossella v. Adams, No. 85007/2002 (Richmond Cnty. Sup. Ct.). The RNC, New York GOP, and a bipartisan coalition of officeholders and concerned citizens, challenged a New York City law allowing non-citizens to vote in city elections. The trial court granted summary judgment to Plaintiffs, holding that the city’s law violates state law. On February 21, 2024, the Appellate Division affirmed the trial court, holding that the city’s law violates the New York state constitution. On March 23, Intervenor-Defendants filed a notice of appeal to the New York Court of Appeals. Briefing is currently underway in the Court of Appeals.

NORTH CAROLINA

Kivett v. N.C. State Board of Elections, No. 24CV031557-910 (Wake Cnty.). The RNC, North Carolina GOP, and two North Carolina voters filed ([link removed]) a lawsuit challenging a state statute that purports to allow certain individuals overseas who never resided in North Carolina to register to vote in the state. The statute is inconsistent with the state constitution, which clearly requires residency to be eligible to vote, nor are these voters covered by the federal UOCAVA statute. Read more about the case from The Federalist here ([link removed]) . On October 9, the DNC filed a motion to intervene. On October 11, Plaintiffs filed a motion for a preliminary injunction. filed
([link removed]) a petition for writ of supersedeas and motion for temporary stay and temporary injunction. filed ([link removed]) an emergency application to the North Carolina Supreme Court.

RNC v. N.C. State Board of Elections, No. 24CV026995-910 (Wake Cnty.). filed ([link removed]) this lawsuit to compel the Board to attempt to collect this information from these registrants or else remove them from the voter rolls. On September 23, the State Board filed a notice of removal from Wake County to federal district court. On September 30, Defendants filed a motion to dismiss in federal court and a motion to expedite. On October 1, the federal court granted the motion to expedite and set an expedited briefing schedule. Plaintiffs a motion to remand to state court and for expedited consideration of the same. On October 17, the court partially granted ([link removed]) the State Board’s motion to dismiss and
remanded the remaining state-law claim to state court. reversed ([link removed]) the district court’s remand order. Litigation will continue in federal court. Update: On November 22, the district court denied the state board defendants’ motion to dismiss Count II.

Wasserberg v. N.C. State Board of Elections, No. 24CV027855-910 (Wake Cnty.). The RNC, North Carolina GOP, and a North Carolina voter filed ([link removed]) this lawsuit challenging the NCSBE’s policy that disregards the statutory requirement that absentee ballots must be returned in a sealed security envelope in order to count . On October 9, the State Board filed a notice of removal from Wake County to federal district court. On October 14, Plaintiffs filed a motion to remand to state court. On October 16, the State Board filed a motion to dismiss. On October 21, the State Board filed a response in opposition to Plaintiffs’ motion to remand. On October 23, Plaintiffs filed a reply in support of their motion to remand. On October 31, the federal district court denied Plaintiffs’ motion to remand. Litigation will continue in federal court. Update: On
November 20, Plaintiffs filed a response in opposition to the Board’s motion to dismiss.

North Carolina Republican Party v. N.C. State Board of Elections, No. 24CV026820-910 (Wake Cnty.). filed this lawsuit to compel the Board to enforce the law. On August 28, Plaintiffs filed a motion for preliminary injunction. On September 25, Defendants filed a motion to dismiss. On September 27, Plaintiffs filed ([link removed]) a response in opposition to the motion to intervene. On October 8, the court granted the motion to intervene filed by North Carolina Asian American Together and El Pueblo. On October 22, Intervenors filed a motion to dismiss.

Voto Latino v. Hirsch, No. 1:23-CV-861-TDS (M.D.N.C.); Democratic National Committee v. N.C. State Board of Elections , No. 1:23-CV-862-TDS (M.D.N.C.). On October 10, 2023, the North Carolina General Assembly overrode the Governor’s veto of SB 747, which contains numerous important election-integrity provisions, including regulations on same-day voter registration, a requirement to return absentee ballots by Election Day, and legal protections for poll watchers. Plaintiffs filed these lawsuits shortly after the veto override challenging provisions of SB 747. The RNC and North Carolina GOP were granted intervention. and filed responses in opposition to plaintiffs’ motions for a preliminary injunction. On January 21, 2024, the court issued a narrow preliminary injunction requiring election officials to provide notice to same-day registrant-voters whose address verification card is returned as undeliverable, but otherwise allowing the challenged provisions of SB 747 to remain in effect. On
April 9, the parties filed a joint motion to stay the DNC case, which the court granted one day later. On April 29, the district court granted the joint motion to stay in the Voto Latino case. Thus, the provisions challenged in these lawsuits were in effect for the 2024 election.

PENNSYLVANIA

RNC v. All 67 County Boards of Elections, No. 136 MM 2024 (Pa. S. Ct.). On November 14, the RNC and PA GOP filed ([link removed]) a King’s Bench Petition against all 67 Pennsylvania county boards of elections in the Pennsylvania Supreme Court after some counties counted undated or wrongly dated mail-in ballots in the November 2024 general election, in violation of the Supreme Court’s orders in Baxter v. Philadelphia Board of Elections and New PA Project Education Fund v. Schmidt. On November 15, the DSCC and Bob Casey for Senate filed a motion to intervene and a response to the RNC’s petition. On November 18, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ordered ([link removed]) county boards to comply with its previous rulings and
reject undated or incorrectly dated ballots.

Baxter v. Philadelphia Board of Elections, No. 240902481 (Philadelphia Cnty. Ct. of Common Pleas). On September 23, Plaintiffs filed this lawsuit seeking to require Philadelphia to count undated ballots received in a recent special election. On September 26, the RNC and PA GOP filed a petition for leave to intervene. On September 26, the court ordered the Board to count the undated ballots. On October 3, the Board filed a notice of appeal. On October 4, the RNC and PA GOP filed a notice of appeal. On October 14, the Board filed their opening brief. ruled ([link removed]) that enforcing the dated ballot requirement violates the state constitution. On October 31, the RNC and PA GOP filed ([link removed]) an emergency
application for extraordinary relief in the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. Plaintiffs filed ([link removed]) a response to the RNC and PA GOP’s application for extraordinary relief. RITE filed ([link removed]) an amicus brief in support of the RNC and PA GOP’s application. On November 1, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court granted ([link removed]) our application and stayed the lower court decision. Thus, the dated ballot requirement was in effect for the November 2024 election. Update: On November 22, Plaintiffs and Defendant filed their answers to the RNC and PA GOP’s application for allowance
of appeal.

Genser v. Butler County Board of Elections, No. 24-40116 (). On April 29, Plaintiffs filed a lawsuit seeking to compel the Butler County Board of Elections to allow voters who do not return their mail ballot inside the required secrecy envelope to cast a provisional ballot, which is contrary to the county’s policy. On May 6, the RNC and Pennsylvania GOP filed a petition to intervene and proposed motion to dismiss. State law requires all mail ballots to be returned inside secrecy envelopes, and the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has held that counties are not required to allow curing of mail ballot errors. On May 7, the court granted the petition to intervene, held a hearing, and set a briefing schedule. On June 28, the RNC and Pennsylvania GOP filed a brief in opposition to petitioners’ request for relief. dismissed the case, agreeing with the RNC and PA GOP that Butler County may enforce its policy. On August 20, Plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal to the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court. On
August 23, the RNC and Pennsylvania GOP filed their brief on appeal. On September 5, the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court the trial court’s ruling. On September 8, the RNC and Pennsylvania GOP filed their petition for allowance of appeal in the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. granted ([link removed]) the RNC and Pennsylvania GOP’s petition for allowance of appeal. On September 24, Butler County and Republican Appellants filed ([link removed]) their opening brief on appeal. On September 26, Appellees Genser and PA Democratic Party filed their opening briefs. affirmed ([link removed]) the
Commonwealth Court’s ruling. On October 25, the Republican appellants filed ([link removed]) a writ of supersedeas asking the PA Supreme Court to stay its decision pending their appeal of the case to the U.S. Supreme Court. filed ([link removed]) an emergency application in the U.S. Supreme Court to stay the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s ruling. On October 30, Plaintiffs filed their response in opposition to the RNC’s application. On October 31, the RNC filed ([link removed]) a reply in support of their motion in the U.S. Supreme Court. On November 1, the U.S. Supreme Court denied
([link removed]) the stay application.

Center for Coalfield Justice v. Washington County Board of Elections , No. 2024-3953 (Washington Cnty. Ct. of Common Pleas). Plaintiffs filed this lawsuit challenging Washington County’s policy prohibiting curing of mail ballot errors under the Pennsylvania Constitution. The RNC and PA GOP intervened. On July 26, Republican Intervenors filed a motion for summary judgment. On August 2, the RNC and PA GOP filed a response in opposition to plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment. On August 23, the court granted Plaintiffs’ request for an injunction and partially granted Plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment. On September 5, the Republican Intervenors filed a notice of appeal. On September 10, the RNC and PAGOP filed ([link removed]) their opening brief on appeal. On September 11, Plaintiff-Appellees filed their brief. The DNC and Pennsylvania Democrat Party
filed a brief as amici in support of appellees. On September 24, the Commonwealth Court affirmed ([link removed]) the trial court’s ruling. On September 27, we filed ([link removed]) a petition for leave to appeal to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. On October 5, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court granted ([link removed]) the RNC and PA GOP Petition for Allowance of Appeal. On October 9, the RNC and PA GOP filed ([link removed]) their opening brief. On
October 11, Plaintiff-Appellees filed their opening brief.

Eakin v. Adams County Board of Elections, No. 1:22-cv-340-SPB (W.D. Pa.); Pennsylvania State Conference of the NAACP v. Schmidt, No. 1:22-cv-00339-SPB (W.D. Pa.). The RNC, NRCC, and Pennsylvania GOP are intervenor-defendants. This case follows the RNC’s win in the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, which held that dated signatures were required under state law in order for a ballot to be counted. On November 21, 2023, the court partially granted the plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment in the NAACP case, holding that rejection of mail ballots for lack of compliance with the dated ballot requirement violates the Materiality Provision. On December 6, the RNC, NRCC, and PA GOP appealed to the Third Circuit, which issued a stay pending appeal. Oral argument was held on February 20. On March 27, the Third Circuit issued a decision ([link removed]) holding that the
dated ballot requirement does not violate the Materiality Provision. The court agreed with the RNC’s arguments and held that the Materiality Provision applies only to the voter registration stage of the election process and does not apply to state laws governing how voters must cast their ballots. The Third Circuit is the first federal circuit court to address whether the Materiality Provision applies to ballot-casting rules, and its decision holding that it does not will be strong precedent in other cases across the country. On April 10, Plaintiffs, the Secretary of the Commonwealth, and several counties filed a petition for rehearing en banc. On April 30, the court denied the petition for rehearing.

On May 17, Plaintiffs filed a motion for leave to amend the original complaint in NAACP. On May 24, Intervenor-Defendants filed ([link removed]) a motion in opposition. On May 29, Intervenor-Defendants filed ([link removed]) a motion for summary judgment and Plaintiffs filed ([link removed]) a motion for summary judgment. On June 14, the court granted the motion to amend the complaint.

On June 5, Intervenor-Defendants filed a supplemental motion for summary judgment in Eakin. On June 28, Intervenor-Defendants filed a reply brief in support of their supplemental motion in Eakin. On July 3, Intervenor-Defendants filed a supplemental motion for summary judgment in NAACP. On July 18, Intervenor-Defendants filed a brief in opposition to Plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment. On September 27, the NAACP Plaintiffs filed ([link removed]) a petition for certiorari in the U.S. Supreme Court on the Materiality Provision claim.

TEXAS

La Union del Pueblo Entero v. Abbott , No. 5:21-cv-00844-XR (W.D. Tex.). Plaintiffs in this consolidated lawsuit challenge SB 1, a Texas election integrity law. The district court denied the RNC, NRSC, NRCC, and Harris County and Dallas County Republican Parties’ initial motion to intervene. The party committees appealed to the Fifth Circuit, which reversed and held the committees were entitled to intervene as of right. The State Defendants filed motions to dismiss on immunity grounds. The court mostly denied the motions, allowing the cases to proceed. The State Defendants filed interlocutory appeals, which remain pending in the Fifth Circuit.

On November 29, the district court issued an order enjoining the requirement that voters put their ID number on mail ballot applications and envelopes, holding it violates the Materiality Provision of the Civil Rights Act. The State and Republican Intervenors appealed and asked for a stay pending appeal. On December 15, the Fifth Circuit granted the motion for stay pending appeal, holding that the State and Republican Intervenors were likely to succeed on the merits. The ID requirement is therefore in effect while the appeal is pending. Trial on the remaining claims began on September 11 and finished on October 20. On June 12, Intervenor-Appellants’ private plaintiffs and the United States filed response briefs in the Fifth Circuit. On September 17, the Republican Intervenors filed ([link removed]) a reply brief in the Fifth Circuit.

On September 28, the district court struck ([link removed]) down a provision of the law restricting ballot harvesting. On October 1, the state defendants and Republican intervenors appealed to the Fifth Circuit. The defendants and intervenors are seeking a stay pending appeal. issued ([link removed]) a stay pending appeal, ensuring the ballot harvesting ban will remain in effect for the election. On October 11, the district court struck down portions of SB 1 that limited who could assist voters in marking and return their ballot. On October 17, Defendants appealed that decision to the 5th Circuit. Update: On November 5, the state defendants and Republican intervenors filed a motion to stay pending appeal.

VERMONT

Morin v. City of Burlington, No. 24-CV-02403 (Chittenden Sup. Ct). filed ([link removed]) a lawsuit challenging a city law allowing non-citizens to vote in certain local elections. On July 9, Defendants filed a motion to dismiss.

WISCONSIN 

RNC v. City of Milwaukee Elections Commission, No. 2024-CV-008800 (Milwaukee Cnty. Cir. Ct.). The Milwaukee Elections Commission announced the weekend before the election that certain voting precincts may be limited to only one Republican and one Democrat poll watcher on Election Day but did not disclose which precincts would be affected. The RNC asked ([link removed]) for an order enjoining the directive. The city represented to the court that it would not maintain such a policy on Election Day. Accordingly, the RNC voluntarily dismissed the case.

Kormanik v. Wisconsin Elections Commission, No. 2022-CV-1395 (Waukesha Cnty. Cir. Ct.). Plaintiff On November 29, 2023, the court Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment, holding that the WEC’s guidance is unlawful. On January 16, 2024, the court entered a declaratory judgment in favor of Plaintiff. On March 5, intervenor-defendant Rise, Inc. appealed the decision to the Wisconsin Court of Appeals. On April 4, Rise, Inc. filed a petition to bypass the court of appeals with the Wisconsin Supreme Court. On April 18, Plaintiff filed a response in opposition to the petition for bypass. On July 18, the court paused the proceedings pending the Wisconsin Supreme Court’s decision in Brown v. Wisconsin Elections Commission.

Brown v. Wisconsin Elections Commission, No. 2022-CV-1324 (Racine Cnty. Cir. Ct.). Plaintiff challenges WEC’s dismissal of his administrative complaint against the City of Racine’s use of mobile voting sites. On January 8, 2024, the court held that the use of mobile voting sites is inconsistent with Wisconsin election law. On February 9, Racine filed a notice of appeal. On April 1, the trial court denied the defendants’ and intervenors’ motions to stay the decision pending appeal. On May 3, the Wisconsin Supreme Court granted the intervenors’ petition to bypass the court of appeals. On June 3, intervenors Wisconsin Alliance for Retired Americans filed their opening brief in the Wisconsin Supreme Court. On June 11, the state Supreme Court granted WEC’s motion to stay a portion of the trial court’s opinion. amicus brief ([link removed]) . The Wisconsin
Supreme Court held oral argument on September 10.


------------------------------------------------------------

Keep Up the Good Work!

============================================================

Friends, we are witnessing history in the making in America! We have much to feel good about, so let's take some time to celebrate what we accomplished together. Once you've celebrated enough, let's get back to work. Start with the basics like hosting house meetings, calling friends and neighbors and invited them to lunch, or hosting an elected representative to speak to a group of volunteers. The possibilities are endless. Just do something!

We have a lot of work to do to keep the momentum going and we can and should have fun working the mission together!

So, I encourage you to rest and recharge over the holidays, then get back at it. Reach out to those you would normally not mingle with and get to know your fellow conservatives. Don't be afraid to start a dialogue about our vision and hope for the future of our families, our beloved Hawai'i and America. If we believe in our purpose and our mission, let's not let anything stand in our way. We can do anything when we work together.

Warmest Aloha,
Laura


Laura Nakanelua
National Committeewoman, Hawai'i
Republican National Committee
** [email protected] (mailto:[email protected])


Copyright © 2024 Hawaii Republican Party, All rights reserved.
Paid for by the Hawaii Republican Party. Not authorized by any candidate or candidate committee. www.thehawaiirepublicanparty.com

Our mailing address is:
Hawaii Republican Party
500 Ala Moana Blvd Honolulu
Suite 7400
Honolulu, HI 96818
USA
Want to change how you receive these emails?
You can ** update your preferences ([link removed])
or ** unsubscribe from this list ([link removed])
.
Email Marketing Powered by Mailchimp
[link removed]