PHILADELPHIA – A federal lawsuit looking to compel Pennsylvania election officials to change how voters’ signatures are verified on mail-in ballots prior to this year’s Presidential election, has been voluntarily dismissed by its plaintiffs.
The League of Women Voters of Pennsylvania, the Urban League of Greater Pittsburgh, Amy Campbell and William Gilligan first filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania on Aug. 7 versus Secretary of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Kathy Boockvar, Director of the Bureau of Election Services and Notaries Jessica Mathis, the Allegheny County Board of Elections, the Bucks County Board of Elections, the Philadelphia County Board of Elections and several members of those respective boards of election.
The lawsuit said that county election officials depend on the ability to match signatures in order to verify mail-in ballots, but do not give voters proper notice if their ballot was rejected or invalidated because of a problem with the signature, and do not provide an opportunity to fix ballots with no signatures or where there may be a perceived non-matching signature.
“Each time a county board of elections – comprised of laypersons with no expertise in handwriting analysis – subjectively believes there is a mismatch between the signature accompanying the voter’s mail-in ballot and the signature in the voter’s file, that ballot is not counted, notwithstanding the many benign factors that can cause signature variation,” the suit stated.
However, voters who vote in person at a polling place are given the opportunity to verify their identity when an issue arises with verifying a signature and can cast a ballot when it is resolved.
A state law passed last year largely expanded mail-in voting access in Pennsylvania, and nearly 1.5 million voters submitted mail-in ballots in the June primary election.
“According to news reports, over 26,500 mail-in ballots were rejected in the June 2020 Pennsylvania primary. Among those were voters’ whose ballots were rejected for signature-related errors or matters of penmanship. Without judicial intervention, this pattern of disenfranchisement will continue in every election,” the suit said.
Plaintiff, Amy Campbell, a 26 year-old Philadelphia woman, said her ballot was rejected because Philadelphia County election officials had no signature of hers on file to compare it with.
“Her vote simply did not count,” the suit said.
Fellow plaintiff, William Gilligan, an 83 year-old Bucks County man, explained that he had suffered two major strokes and due to his medical issues, can’t sign his name the same way every time.
“Given his many medical conditions, he is at very high risk for COVID-19. He cannot vote in person. Mr. Gilligan is very concerned that his ballot will be rejected due to a potential signature mismatch. If Mr. Gilligan received notice of any perceived mismatch, he could and would confirm his signature and have his ballot counted,” per the suit.
UPDATE
Per recent guidance from Boockvar, however, the plaintiffs opted to voluntarily dismiss the suit on Sept. 14.
According to Boockvar’s guidance, for the 2020 General Election this fall and in future elections, Pennsylvania county boards of elections can no longer reject a ballot based solely on an election official’s belief that a signature does not match the signature in the voter’s file.
“In light of the issuance of guidance by the Secretary of the Commonwealth on Sept. 11, 2020 recognizing and advising County Boards of Election that ‘the Pennsylvania Election Code does not authorize the county board of elections to set aside returned absentee or mail-in ballots based solely on signature analysis by the county board of elections’, plaintiffs hereby dismiss this action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(i). As of the time of this filing, no defendant has filed either an answer or a motion for summary judgment,” counsel for the plaintiffs stated.
Prior to dismissal and for counts of denial of due process under the 14th Amendment, denial of the right to vote under the 1st and 14th Amendments and denial of equal protection under the 14th Amendment, the plaintiffs are seeking:
• A declaratory judgment that Pennsylvania’s existing signature verification procedures for mail-in voting violated the 1st and 14th Amendments;
• Preliminary and permanent injunctions enjoining defendants, their agents, employees, and successors, and all those persons acting in concert or participation with them from implementing signature verification procedures that lack uniform standards or uniform procedures for notification and opportunity to cure;
• Preliminary and permanent orders for defendants to establish a procedure by which voters may cure deficiencies in their absentee or mail-in ballots, to include providing timely and reasonable notice of such deficiencies and a meaningful opportunity to cure, and to order defendants Boockvar and Mathis to provide guidance to all county election officials requiring implementation of that procedure;
• Attorney’s fees, costs, and litigation expenses pursuant to 42 U.S.C. Section 1988 and 42 U.S.C. Section 12133; and other and further relief that the Court may determine to be necessary or proper.
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania case 2:20-cv-03850
From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com