In critical battleground states, allies of Donald Trump are initiating lawsuits to prepare for a potential election challenge should he lose. Legal groups connected to Trump and his supporters have amassed millions from conservative foundations, filing numerous lawsuits that question voting rules in swing states, a move that election watchdogs warn is sowing distrust in the electoral process.
Peter Stone, reporting from Washington, notes that these lawsuits, backed by organizations like America First Legal and the Public Interest Legal Foundation, aim to set the stage for contesting the results of the upcoming presidential election if Trump is defeated by Kamala Harris. A financial analysis by the Center for Media and Democracy revealed that these groups secured over $30 million from the Bradley Impact Fund and the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation between 2017 and 2022.
The lawsuits brought forth by these groups often lean on conspiracy theories, including unfounded claims of non-citizen voting and inflated voter rolls. Larry Noble, a former general counsel at the Federal Election Commission, commented, “These lawsuits seem to be aimed at making it more difficult for people to vote, leading to disenfranchisement and intimidation of legitimate voters while creating confusion.” He added that they appear to be laying the groundwork for a post-election challenge if Trump loses.
The lack of evidence supporting claims of non-citizen voting further undermines these lawsuits, as noted by Noble. A study conducted by the Brennan Center for Justice found only 30 cases of alleged non-citizen voting among 23.5 million ballots cast during the 2016 presidential election.
Several other election watchdogs have also raised alarms about the surge in litigation instigated by Trump’s allies. David Becker, from the Center for Election Innovation & Research, pointed out that the filings often lack supporting evidence and that many plaintiffs were aware of the challenged voting policies long before filing their lawsuits. “While they’re very unlikely to get the relief they’re seeking, this could later fuel claims that the election was stolen,” he warned.
Recent examples include a lawsuit filed by the Public Interest Legal Foundation in Michigan, which aimed to address alleged issues with voter rolls containing names of deceased individuals. However, federal judges have dismissed such claims, affirming that Michigan already has effective measures in place for removing these names.
Similarly, in Arizona, America First Legal has initiated litigation concerning 44,000 voters registered without proof of citizenship, reflecting ongoing partisan disputes about voter registration protocols that critics argue are based on misinformation to suppress voter turnout.
Experts like Leah Tulin of the Brennan Center have expressed skepticism regarding the legitimacy of these lawsuits, characterizing many as vehicles for spreading conspiracy theories rather than serious legal challenges. Tulin underscored the perception that these actions are less about genuine issues and more about creating press-worthy narratives.
As Trump’s allies continue to push these lawsuits, some observers, including former Republican representative Charlie Dent, believe there is a coordinated effort to challenge vote certifications in key states if the election outcome is unfavorable to Trump. Michael Beckel, research director at Issue One, warns that this wave of litigation, motivated by dark-money donations, poses risks to electoral integrity and could disenfranchise citizens.
Noble emphasizes the long-term dangers of this movement, stating, “These actions are not merely from fringe groups; they have strong backing from Trump and the Republican National Committee.” He concludes that the undermining of election integrity is aimed at propelling Trump back into power, regardless of the implications for democracy.
