Federal judge throws out RNC lawsuit claiming Michigan government failed to clear voter lists News
Wikimedia Commons // Lorie Shaull // CC
Federal judge throws out RNC lawsuit claiming Michigan government failed to clear voter lists

A US federal court on Tuesday dismissed a lawsuit by the Republican National Committee (RNC) alleging the Michigan state government failed to properly clear its voting records in accordance with federal voting registration laws. Under the National Voter Registry Act, specifically 52 U.S.C. § 20507, states are required to make “reasonable” efforts to clear voter registries of deceased or otherwise ineligible voters.

Judge Jane Beckering, responding to a motion to dismiss from the state, found the petition by the RNC lacked standing and had failed to state a plausible claim. Under US civil procedure rules, a party may bring a suit only where they can prove there is “injury in fact.” For standing to exist, a plaintiff must demonstrate that they “1) suffered some actual or threatened injury; 2) that injury can fairly be traced to the challenged action of the defendant; and 3) that the injury is likely to be redressed by a favorable decision.”

The RNC claimed that its concerns surrounding Michigan’s election integrity is a “proper basis for standing.” The party also alleged it could have found different uses for the resources expended on investigating whether Michigan voter rolls were being properly cleared. However, Judge Beckering reiterated case law declaring that speculative and general psychological harms are not sufficient to meet these criteria, nor would the decision of the RNC to focus on the speculative harms associated with alleged election interference.

Judge Beckering also highlighted the RNC’s failure to identify any ineligible voters erroneously listed on the Michigan voter registry, identify any breakdown in Michigan’s program of removing ineligible voters, or seek any particular relief. The RNC had merely highlighted inconsistencies between the 2022 census data and a number of registered voters on the 2024 registry of all voters, which includes voters who are also listed as inactive. While the plaintiffs argued there should be assumed negligence in contravention of election law, because of the inconsistencies in numbers, the court found that the mere possibility of a statutory violation, without good evidence to prove plausibility, is insufficient.

Concerns of election tampering ahead of the 2024 US presidential election have been the cause of multiple suits and legislation concerning purported election integrity concerns, including attempts to restrict mail-in voting and remove unregistered voters.