The outcome of the upcoming presidential race will pivot on the vote count on election night and possibly the days following. This process of counting votes has become the center of public and political scrutiny, particularly after former President Donald Trump’s efforts in 2020 to challenge and overturn his electoral defeat. His insistence on disputing the counts made the certification of election results, a process once considered routine, a matter of political contention. For instance, Trump attempted to persuade Michigan Republican officials not to certify Joe Biden’s victory in their state. This tension culminated on January 6, 2021, when Trump urged his supporters to disrupt Congress as it moved to formally certify Biden’s presidency. His narrative and tactics have had lasting implications, particularly for the upcoming election against Democrat Kamala Harris, as his allies prepare to contest certification should he lose.
The certification process for elections in the United States is essentially a three-step procedure, beginning at local government levels, progressing to state authorities, and culminating in Congress. Local jurisdictions must first certify the vote totals from various counties before states can officially declare a winner and appoint electors for the Electoral College. Ultimately, Congress then ratifies these electors’ votes. The complexity of this process is compounded by the large number of individual election jurisdictions, many of which have become dominated by Trump allies. If any local board refuses to certify its results, it could potentially halt the entire state’s confirmation of election outcomes.
Despite these political dynamics, legal experts assert that there is virtually no legal precedent that allows for the overturning of election losses simply by refusing to certify locally. Case law in the U.S. supports the idea that local officials have an obligation to certify election results regardless of their personal beliefs. Challenges to vote counts are permissible, but they must follow due process in court rather than being stymied by local boards. Recent attempts by Trump supporters to block results in states like Arizona, Michigan, and New Mexico were either undermined in court or deferred due to legal pressure, debunking the myth that an individual jurisdiction can single-handedly affect the state certification.
In 2020, Trump actively pushed for state leaders to contest their states’ certified results and instead support alternative electors to represent him in the Electoral College—a strategy that ultimately failed. Looking toward the 2024 election, four of the six swing states where Trump previously disputed his defeat are presently led by Democratic governors, while the remaining two have Republican governors who might be resistant to participating in similar tactics. For example, Georgia’s Governor Brian Kemp openly defied Trump in the last election, and Nevada’s Joe Lombardo gained election partly due to Democratic support, indicating a potential lack of alignment with Trump’s strategies to disrupt certification.
The final stage of the election certification process is conducted in Congress, expected to take place on January 6 when states have finalized their results and electors have cast their votes. Historically, Trump and his supporters misconstrued this step, claiming that Congress could reject state electoral votes that were deemed problematic. Despite the insurrection on January 6, 2021, a significant faction of House Republicans and some senators still supported rejecting Electoral College votes from specific states, though they did not possess the needed majority to alter the election’s outcome. This poses a question for the upcoming election: should Harris win, will Congress maintain the bipartisan resolve seen during Biden’s certification in 2020?
In response to the contentious electoral landscape, Congress has amended the electoral certification laws, making it more challenging to outright reject state-certified votes. These amendments have implications for the upcoming election, and whether bipartisan majorities will persist in endorsing the integrity of the electoral process remains uncertain. The evolving dynamics and strategies surrounding election certification are crucial in understanding the state of American democracy and its electoral mechanics. The Associated Press is committed to elucidating these developments through its ongoing “Explaining Election 2024” initiative, which aims to grapple with the complexities of electoral systems and democracy in the United States.
