Skip to main content

Election Denialism Lost in Key Midterm Races, but the Fight is Far From Over


In the days and weeks after the 2020 presidential election, outright lies peddled on the national stage about the validity and security of state-administered elections proliferated. Politicians and political commentators spread and amplified falsehood after falsehood, baselessly alleging that the election was stolen through widespread fraud simply because their candidate of choice lost. Despite the fact that these allegations were proven false time and time again, and rejected by scores of state and federal courts, growing segments of the population became adherents to this “Big Lie.” This culminated in the devastating and unprecedented January 6 attacks on our Capitol that attempted to prevent a duly-elected president from assuming office.

One of the lasting threats galvanized by the “Big Lie” is election denialism — baselessly casting doubt on or refusing to accept the outcome of free, fair, and secure elections. In the face of ample evidence of the legitimacy of the 2020 election outcome, election deniers continue to try to undermine faith in our electoral process and democracy through baseless allegations of election fraud for personal and political gain. Alarmingly, many extreme election deniers secured candidacies for key state and federal positions that would give them direct control or influence over election administration and policy.

Americans Voted to Protect Democracy

It became clear as we approached the 2022 midterm elections that democracy itself — in addition to so many of our civil liberties — was at stake and on the ballot. Nearly 200 candidates on the ballot outright denied the 2020 presidential results through rhetoric or actions, and many more cast doubts on the 2020 election results. This included U.S. Senate candidates in Arizona and Nevada; U.S. House candidates in almost every state; gubernatorial candidates in Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Arizona; and secretary of state candidates in Arizona, Michigan, and Nevada, just to name a few.

Now, with most of the results of the midterm elections in, there is no doubt that the American people took firm stances against election denialism and voted to protect our democracy in the most vital races.

Election deniers that vied to be the next secretary of state — a position that involves directly overseeing state and local elections — lost their races in key battleground states, including in Arizona, Minnesota, and Nevada. The ACLU and our state affiliates made a substantial investment in educating voters about the vital role of secretaries of state and where candidates stood on protecting voting rights and democracy.

Two of the most fervent and vocal election deniers running for governor lost their races in Arizona and Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania is especially important because its governor appoints the secretary of state.

The Fights Ahead

Although this election season was an important step towards restoring democracy, the fight is far from over. While some of the most extreme election deniers failed in vital competitive races, many election deniers were elected, particularly to the U.S. House of Representatives and statehouses around the country. As we turn our focus toward the 2024 elections and beyond, Congress must enact bipartisan reforms to the Electoral Count Act before this Congress ends to ensure that electoral votes tallied by Congress accurately reflect each state’s popular vote for president. And we must continue to fight for federal voting rights legislation to address voter suppression efforts, fully restore the Voting Rights Act of 1965, and expand access to the ballot.

American Civil Liberties Union
ACLU Comment on House Vote of the Electoral Count Act

Moreover, as state legislative sessions approach, we expect to see continued state-level efforts to interfere with free and fair elections and restrict access to the ballot box. We have seen this before: In 2021 alone, over 400 bills with voter suppression provisions were introduced in states around the country. These suppression efforts included restricting vote by mail, limiting early voting, making it more difficult to register to vote, implementing stricter voter ID requirements, enacting problematic voter purge rules, making it harder for voters with disabilities to cast a ballot, and threatening election officials and voters with new or increased criminal penalties.

Just this year, at least seven states enacted 10 laws to make voting more difficult by creating new hurdles to voting by mail (including limiting drop boxes and permanent absentee voting) and making it more difficult to register to vote (including through documentary proof of citizen requirements and limiting Election Day registration). Additionally, at least 12 laws that jeopardize the nonpartisan nature of elections or aim to intimidate election officials and voters with new civil or criminal penalties were enacted in 2022.

While we continue to fight back against attacks on voting rights and the integrity of our elections, we are doubling down on our proactive efforts to increase access to the ballot box and safeguard our democracy. In states such as New Mexico, we will build on progress made this session to push for comprehensive voting rights legislation that restores the voting rights of people convicted of felonies and makes it easier for Indigenous voters to exercise their right to vote.

In Connecticut, following the success of a ballot measure that removed a constitutional restriction on early in-person voting, the legislature has an opportunity to enact strong, accessible early in-person voting legislation. In Michigan, we will build on this midterm’s electoral successes by working to expand Election Day registration locations, automatic voter registration opportunities, and youth voting rights. We will also advocate for the adoption of the National Popular Vote Compact in states that have yet to enact it to move us closer to our ideal of one person, one vote in presidential elections, and we will advocate for the few remaining states that do not utilize voting machines with paper trails for all elections to do so.

Voting rights and protecting our democracy has always been a top priority for the ACLU. Our ACLU affiliates and our millions of supporters stand ready to continue this fight. We invite you to join us in upholding our democracy and ensuring that each and every voice — and vote — counts.

We need you with us to keep fighting
Donate today
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Trump's Attempt to Unilaterally Control State and Local Funding is Dangerous, Dumb, and Undemocratic

The Trump administration has not been subtle in its desire to use federal funding for political punishment. Whether threatening to cut off grants to sanctuary cities, to block financial assistance to states that push back against the president’s demands, or to freeze all federal grants and loans for social services across the country, Trump and his allies want us to believe they can wield the federal budget like a weapon. The reality is that the administration’s ability to withhold or condition funding is far more limited than they let on. The Constitution, Supreme Court precedent, and long-standing federal law stand firmly in the way of this brazen abuse of presidential power. Trump’s Attempted Funding Freeze? Blocked Immediately A week into his second administration, Trump attempted to freeze trillions of dollars in federal grants and loans that fund a vast array of critical services already approved by Congress. If allowed to go into effect, this unprecedented and far-reaching...
Post a Comment
Read more

Documents Reveal Confusion and Lack of Training in Texas Execution

As Texas seeks to execute Carl Buntion today and Melissa Lucio next week, it is worth reflecting on the grave and irreversible failures that occurred when the state executed Quintin Jones on May 19, 2021. For the first time in its history — and in violation of a federal court’s directive and the Texas Administrative Code — Texas excluded the media from witnessing the state’s execution of Quintin Jones. In the months that followed, Texas executed two additional people without providing any assurance that the underlying dysfunction causing errors at Mr. Jones’ execution were addressed. This is particularly concerning given that Texas has executed far more people than any other state and has botched numerous executions. The First Amendment guarantees the public and the press have a right to observe executions. Media access to executions is a critical form of public oversight as the government exerts its power to end a human life. Consistent with Texas policy, two reporters travelled t...
Post a Comment
Read more

The Supreme Court Declined a Protestors' Rights Case. Here's What You Need to Know.

The Supreme Court recently declined to hear a case, Mckesson v. Doe , that could have affirmed that the First Amendment protects protest organizers from being held liable for illegal actions committed by others present that organizers did not direct or intend. The high court’s decision to not hear the case at this time left in place an opinion by the Fifth Circuit, which covers Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas, that said a protest organizer could be liable for the independent, violent actions of others based on nothing more than a showing of negligence. Across the country, many people have expressed concern about how the Supreme Court’s decision not to review, or hear, the case at this stage could impact the right to protest. The ACLU, which asked the court to take up the case, breaks down what the court’s denial of review means. What Happened in Mckesson v. Doe? The case, Mckesson v. Doe , was brought by a police officer against DeRay Mckesson , a prominent civil rights activi...
Post a Comment
Read more