The upcoming races for secretary of state will be referenda on the Big Lie. ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌  ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌  ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌  ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌  ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌  ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌  ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌  ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ 
The Briefing
In a 2018 Johns Hopkins survey, more than 80 percent of respondents couldn’t name their state legislators. One-third didn’t know who their governor was. About the same proportion couldn’t remember who they voted for in down-ballot state races. In other words, Americans spent little time thinking about state government.
The intrinsically partisan nature of the state secretary of state job has occasionally brought some officeholders to national attention. Katherine Harris co-chaired George W. Bush’s Florida campaign in 2000, then played a key role in the recount (and was even portrayed by Joan Cusack on television!). Brian Kemp of Georgia drew criticism when he oversaw his own election to the governorship, supervising voter-roll purges that disproportionately affected Black voters. Savvy insiders knew these were important jobs.
After the 2020 election, everyone knew. Donald Trump’s postelection demand to “find 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have,” practically made Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger into a household name. By transforming a historically nonpartisan ministerial duty — the certification of election results — into a partisan high-wire act, Trump instantly made state secretary of state a high-profile post.
A new monthly series of Brennan Center reports confirms that the stakes have been raised in races to oversee state elections. My colleague Ian Vandewalker found that across key battleground states, “contributions are three times higher than they were at this point in the 2018 cycle and almost eight times higher than 2014. The numbers are particularly high in Arizona, Georgia, and Michigan.”
Arizona Republican Mark Finchem already boasts six times as many donors as every candidate in the 2018 election combined. (He’s also retailed QAnon conspiracy theories, according to CNN.)
Notably, funds are flowing not just from dark money sources and big donors. These races now attract donations from across the country. Two-thirds of Finchem’s donors live outside of Arizona. The two leading fundraisers in the Georgia secretary of state race have already collected more out-of-state money than the combined total of all candidates in the 2018 election.
As an advocate for a robust participatory democracy, I think it’s great that so many people are interested in down-ballot state elections. I am, however, concerned about the reason for this interest — it’s clear that the Big Lie is driving these donations. Finchem has built his candidacy around a promise to “decertify three 2020 county elections,” and in Michigan, Kristina Karamo has said voting machines in the state could have flipped 200,000 votes to Joe Biden. For their part, Democrats are raising huge sums by arguing that their opponents represent a mortal threat to democracy. For example, Reginald Bolding, one of Finchem’s opponents, ran an ad warning, “The fate of our democracy is on the line right now.”
Their traditionally low profile notwithstanding, secretaries of state wield significant power over our elections. They oversee voter registration, maintain voter databases, and manage elections themselves. The latest Brennan Center report paints a worrying picture of an increasingly partisan approach to this work. Election administration decisions should be based on solid evidence and clear standards, not speculation, fear-mongering, or outright lies.

 

Democracy
The Court Takes Aim at the Voting Rights Act (Again)
Last week, the Supreme Court agreed to hear an Alabama redistricting case that could forbid considering race when challenging maps under the Voting Rights Act. Michael Li makes clear the troubling signal the Court has sent by taking this case, and he explains the dire stakes of a win for Alabama: “States could adopt any number of facially neutral redistricting rules engineered in reality to make it all but impossible to draw minority districts. It, in short, would be the end of the VRA as we know it, effectively subordinating federal law to state law.” Read more

 

Constitution
How the CIA Is Acting Outside the Law to Spy on Americans
Two senators have sounded a privacy alarm, revealing last week that the CIA has been secretly conducting a bulk collection program and searching through the resulting data for information about Americans. The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (not to mention the Fourth Amendment) includes rules that the government must follow to protect Americans’ privacy. But the CIA is operating under Executive Order 12333, which provides for no oversight by Congress or the courts. Elizabeth Goitein explains how this privacy gap works and urges Congress to fill it. Read more
Urging Accountability at the Pentagon
When President Biden signed the 2022 National Defense Authorization Act, he issued a signing statement indicating that the Defense Department would not comply with legal requirements to report to Congress on issues as important as civilian casualties and the costs of emergency powers. The Brennan Center joined 41 other civil society organizations to protest the statement. “Should this administration continue to enable DOD’s lack of accountability, Congress should rethink whether this agency deserves, and can be trusted with, broad operational authorities and a budget of $778 billion,” Katherine Yon Ebright writes. THE HILL

 

Fellows
Moving Away From a Politics of Racial Resentment
In his inaugural column for The xxxxxx, Brennan Center Fellows Program Director Ted Johnson analyzes the scholarly literature on racial resentment and brings it into conversation with the politics of today, from manufactured political outrage to genuine tensions in race relations. “We cannot have real conversations about the future of our country,” he writes, “if we do not wrestle with how much our positions on these things are shaped by our views on race.” THE xxxxxx

 

Justice
On Bail and Biases
Major crime in New York City is up nearly 40 percent from just a year ago. Eric Adams, the new mayor, has sought to gain support from New York State lawmakers for his plans to tackle crime. Adams and others have criticized the state’s longstanding ban on judges considering individuals’ “dangerousness” when deciding whether to set bail. Ames Grawert counseled against overturning the ban because it would widen racial disparities in the bail process. “It’s really hard to come to an objective measure of dangerousness that is not burdened on some level by racial bias,” he said. NEW YORK TIMES

 

Coming Up
Thursday, March 24, 6–7 p.m. ET
 
The problem of misinformation on social media has ballooned over the last few years, especially in relation to elections. The result has been further polarization of our already divided country. How do we control this false speech while protecting the First Amendment — and our democracy? Join us for a live discussion with Richard L. Hasen, leading expert on election law and author of the upcoming book Cheap Speech: How Disinformation Poisons Our Politics — and How to Cure It. The discussion will explore how social media companies can solve this problem without shutting down the essential free flow of ideas and opinions. RSVP today
Want to keep up with Brennan Center Live events? Subscribe to the events newsletter.

 

News
  • Alicia Bannon on the lack of demographic and professional diversity in the judiciary // ASSOCIATED PRESS
  • Douglas Keith on President Biden’s Supreme Court nomination pledge // AFP
  • Michael Li on the Supreme Court’s changed approach to Voting Rights Act cases // ROLL CALL
  • Sean Morales-Doyle on the nationwide push to restrict voting rights // CNN
  • Yurij Rudensky on partisan gerrymandering’s distortion of democracy // TRUTHOUT
  • Wendy Weiser on state legislators’ “dangerous” interpretation of the Constitution’s Elections Clause // GOVERNING