Republican lawsuits over overseas and military voting hit setbacks in 2 swing states

Two Republican legal challenges to the legitimacy of ballots cast by U.S. citizens living abroad, including U.S. military members, hit setbacks Monday.

A Michigan state judge dismissed one of three lawsuits that GOP groups filed in swing states in recent weeks, while in a North Carolina-based case, a state judge rejected the Republican National Committee’s request for the court to order that returned ballots of some overseas voters be set aside and not counted until the voters’ eligibility can be confirmed.

The RNC is appealing the North Carolina judge’s ruling, its attorneys told the court in a filing Tuesday, and the Democratic National Committee has filed a request for the judge to dismiss the case. The RNC is also in the process of appealing the decision by the Michigan judge, spokesperson Claire Zunk said Tuesday in a statement.

In the Michigan case, Judge Sima Patel of the state’s Court of Claims issued an opinion that underscored the fact that the RNC brought its case weeks before the last day of voting in this fall’s election. Patel called the lawsuit an “11th hour attempt to disenfranchise these electors in the November 5, 2024 general election.”

For years, Michigan has allowed eligible uniformed service members and other citizens living outside the U.S. to vote in federal elections, as required by a federal law known as the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act. Guidance issued by Michigan’s secretary of state says: “A United States citizen who has never resided in the United States but who has a parent, legal guardian, or spouse who was last domiciled in Michigan is eligible to vote in Michigan as long as the citizen has not registered or voted in another state.”

But in court, the Republican National Committee argued against the eligibility of that category of overseas voters, who, the RNC contended, do not meet requirements under Michigan’s constitution for voters to be state residents.

Patel, however, concluded that the guidance language in the secretary of state’s manual for election officials is “consistent with federal and state law, and the Michigan Constitution.”

In the North Carolina case, the RNC made a similar argument against state election rules that allow absentee voting by citizens who were born outside the U.S. and whose parent or legal guardian’s former residence is in the state.

But with “absolutely no evidence that any person has ever fraudulently claimed that exemption and actually voted in any North Carolina election,” Superior Court Judge John Smith wrote in a ruling released Monday, the court found there is no need for an emergency court order to block that category of overseas voters from casting ballots and to segregate and not process any of their returned ballots.

Smith noted that the election rule the RNC is challenging “has been on the books at least since 2011 as a bill adopted with bi-partisan support,” adding that both sides of this lawsuit “have been involved in elections under the existing statute since its passage without complaint.”

A ruling in a similar federal lawsuit brought by six Republican members of the U.S. House of Representatives from Pennsylvania is expected soon.

Many legal experts say these cases are also not likely to go anywhere in part because they were filed after officials started sending out ballots to overseas voters.

But these experts are concerned the cases are laying groundwork for questioning election results.

Edited by Benjamin Swasey