As the 2024 presidential election approaches, former President Donald Trump continues to assert that he won the 2020 election and expresses a desire for an overwhelming victory that would make the results “too big to rig.” His remarks indicate that he is preparing for an anticipated contentious process following Election Day on November 5, one that could mirror or exceed the drawn-out legal battles of the last election cycle. Both Republicans and Democrats are already gearing up for possible disputes over the outcome. Numerous lawsuits concerning mail-in ballots and voting legitimacy are already underway, predominantly initiated by Republicans, foreshadowing a potentially turbulent post-election atmosphere. Trump’s reluctance to guarantee acceptance of the election results adds to the uncertainty surrounding the election’s integrity.
Democrats are raising alarms that election deniers have strategically planted themselves in pivotal voting-related roles across the country. These positions could lead to resistance against certifying legitimate outcomes, prompting further litigation. Michael Waldman from the Brennan Center for Justice emphasizes that while the election deniers’ tactics were previously improvised, they are now organized and well-funded, underpinning a systemic issue in the electoral process. Despite these challenges, he asserts that the election system is better equipped to manage these emerging threats. The lawyers and organizations involved in litigation have transformed the landscape of electoral processes, spurred by substantial financial contributions aimed at preserving democracy and the integrity of elections.
Election litigation has escalated in recent years, a trend that reflects a growing investment in legal strategies surrounding electoral contests. With over 180 voting and election cases filed in just this year, experts note a stark rise in litigation since the contentious 2000 election, where a Supreme Court decision effectively resolved the contest in favor of George W. Bush. The increase in election-related litigation is closely tied to significant changes in campaign finance rules, allowing for substantial funding for legal challenges, and aligns with a trend where campaigns use legal avenues not only to win court cases but also to project political power and secure donor support.
Trump’s claims of widespread voter fraud in 2020 generated a flurry of lawsuits that were largely dismissed in courts. The Republican National Committee (RNC) has embarked on a robust election integrity initiative for this current election cycle, aiming to deploy 100,000 volunteers and a battalion of legal experts across critical battleground states. People like Claire Zunk of the RNC emphasize the program’s focus on safeguarding legal voting and enhancing election transparency amid accusations of interference by Democrats. Regardless of the outcome of ongoing cases, the potential for post-election litigation remains high, especially concerning the rules governing the certification of votes.
Changes to the Electoral Count Reform Act could further complicate post-election disputes, with new expedited processes for resolving certification challenges. Legal experts anticipate that losing candidates might leverage these rules as last-ditch efforts to contest election outcomes. Concerns about election integrity persist, especially as recent rulings contested new voting regulations in Georgia, raising fears that attempts to push back against judicial decisions could undermine the electoral process and further entrench conspiracy theories around election legitimacy. RNC Chair Michael Whatley reacted strongly against the ruling that invalidated Georgia’s election rules, showcasing the ongoing partisan divide over election laws.
Ultimately, while no county or state has the legitimate authority to refuse to certify election results, the possibility remains that some may attempt to do so, resulting in chaos and delays that could wreak havoc on the electoral process. The convergence of various legal challenges, particularly in tight races, can create significant obstacles for election officials and compound the risk of misinformation and conspiracy theories proliferating. As election day nears, both parties appear set for a battle, suggesting a fraught and contentious electoral landscape that may redefine the principles of democracy in the United States.