President Donald Trump and other Republicans have filed dozens of lawsuits across the country in an attempt to contest the election results.
Most of them have been shot down or withdrawn, and no court has found even a single instance of fraud. Of at least 41 cases to have been filed, including some not directly involving Trump but which could nonetheless affect his standing, at least 27 have been denied, dismissed, settled or withdrawn.
Trump has aggressively ramped up his allegations of election fraud in the weeks since his projected loss, tweeting dozens of debunked theories. His continued refusal to concede to President-election Joe Biden has also deeply hampered the transition process, leaving Biden in the dark on crucial Covid-19 and national security issues.
Here is where things stand as of Sunday morning:
Pennsylvania
3rd U.S. Court of Appeals: In Bognet v. Boockvar, Republicans argued that the extended mail-in ballot deadline challenged the constitution.
- Status: Denied.
U.S. District Court, Eastern District: In Barnette v. Lawrence, the GOP lawsuit claimed that Montgomery County wrongly allowed mail-in voters the chance to cure ballots.
- Status: Dismissed.
U.S. District Court, Eastern District: In Trump v. Philadelphia County Board of Elections, the Trump campaign argued that there was insufficient access by observers.
- Status: Denied. The Trump campaign later admitted that there were a “nonzero number of people in the room” observing the vote count, including some affiliated with the campaign. Judge Paul S. Diamond shot back, “I’m sorry, then what’s your problem?“
U.S. District Court, Middle District: In Pirkle v. Wolf, four voter plaintiffs generalized allegations of fraud, based on complaints issued by third parties.
- Status: Withdrawn.
Pennsylvania Supreme Court: In response to the Canvass of Absentee and Mail-in Ballots, Republicans claim that Philadelphia did not give election observers enough access.
- Status: Denied. The court reversed the petition allowing an appeal. The court rejected the Trump campaign’s claim that mail-in ballots with minor flaws must be rejected.
Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court: In Hamm v. Boockvar, Republicans claimed that the state wrongly allowed voters to cast provisional ballots to cure invalid mail ballots.
- Status: Denied.
Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court: Northampton Republicans challenged notifications of votes that were canceled during prescreening.
- Status: Withdrawn.
Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court: In Trump v. Boockvar, the campaign challenged the three-day deadline extension given to mail-in voters missing identification to supply proof of identification.
- Status: Relief granted. The court found that the secretary of state had no authority to provide an extension. The secretary of state’s office has said the total number of votes is probably fewer than 100 statewide.
Court of Common Pleas, Bucks County: Both the Republican National Committee and the Trump campaign challenged over 2,000 mail-in ballots.
- Status: Active. The Democratic National Committee and Bucks County seek an immediate review in Pennsylvania’s Supreme Court of whether minor oversights can invalidate ballots.
Montgomery County Court of Common Pleas: In Trump v. Montgomery County Board of Elections, the Trump campaign and the RNC challenged about 600 mail-in ballots that lacked voters’ addresses.
- Status: Withdrawn.
U.S. Supreme Court: In Republican Party of Pennsylvania v. Boockvar, Republicans challenged the extended mail-in ballot deadline.
- Status: Active.
3rd Circuit Court of Appels: In Trump v. Boockvar, the campaign is arguing that different provisional ballot practices violate equal protection.
- Status: Active.
- A federal judge on Saturday dismissed the suit in a scathing opinion: “This claim, like Frankenstein’s Monster, has been haphazardly stitched together,” Judge Matthew Brann wrote.
- The Trump campaign appealed the ruling earlier this week, but their appeal was denied on Friday. The ruling states that “calling an election unfair does not make it so.”
Pennsylvania Supreme Court: The Trump campaign appealed a Philadelphia County Board of Elections decision to count five different categories of mail-in and absentee ballots.
- Status: Active. The court is reviewing whether the state election code allows curing some mail-in ballots by casting provisional ballots.
Pennsylvania Supreme Court: In Ziccarelli v. Allegheny County Board of Elections, Nicole Ziccarelli, a GOP legislative candidate, challenged 2,349 undated mail-in ballots.
- Status: Stayed. Ziccarelli sought an injunction Monday to stop the certification of votes in Allegheny County.
Court of Common Pleas for Westmoreland County: Ziccarelli is also challenging a small number of provisional ballots.
- Status: Pending.
Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court: In Kelly v. Pennsylvania, a group of Republicans, led by Rep. Mike Kelly, claimed that the state’s no-excuse mail ballot law violates the state constitution. They sought an order blocking certification of most mail-in votes or that directs the state Assembly to choose the presidential electors.
- Status: Denied.
Michigan
U.S. District Court, Western District: In Johnson/Stoddard v. Benson, two Trump supporters made generalized allegations of voter fraud.
- Status: Withdrawn.
U.S. District Court, Western District: In Trump v. Benson, the campaign claimed that Wayne County denied election challengers proper access to watch election workers handle ballots.
- Status: Withdrawn.
Wayne County Circuit Court, Court of Appeals: In Constantino v. Detroit, two Republican poll challengers alleged irregularities in the vote.
- Status: Denied. The plaintiffs have appealed to the state Supreme Court.
Wayne County Circuit Court: In Stoddard v. Detroit, the plaintiffs claimed that ballots were improperly duplicated by Democratic Party inspectors.
- Status: Denied.
Michigan Court of Claims: In Trump v. Benson, the campaign sought to have more poll observers watch the vote count.
- Status: Denied. The plaintiffs appealed to the appellate court. Judge Cynthia D. Stephens said in her opinion that the case was “inadmissible hearsay within hearsay.” “I heard someone else say something,” Michigan Judge Cynthia Stephens said Thursday, summing up an affidavit submitted by the Trump campaign. “Tell me how that is not hearsay. Come on now!”
U.S. District Court, Western District: In Bally v. Whitmer, a group of voters disputed election results in three counties based on allegations of voting irregularities and fraud.
- Status: Withdrawn.
U.S. District Court, Eastern District: In King v. Whitmer, a group of Michigan Republicans asked a federal judge to reverse Biden’s victory in Michigan, an outcome that was formally certified earlier this week.
- Status: Filed.
Wisconsin
U.S. District Court, Eastern District: In Langenhorst v. Pecore, Republicans made generalized allegations of voter fraud that relied on third-party accounts.
- Status: Dismissed.
Wisconsin Supreme Court: In Wisconsin Voters Alliance v. Wisconsin Election Commission, a conservative group claims that the five cities of Kenosha, Green Bay, Madison, Milwaukee and Racine illegally accepted grants from Facebook CEO, Mark Zuckerburg to improve election systems. They also claim that officials failed to get voter identification for some mail-in ballots.
- Status: Active.
Arizona
Maricopa County Superior Court: In Arizona Republican Party v. Fontes, the Republicans sought a hand recount of the ballots cast in Maricopa County by precinct. The GOP does not allege fraud, but it claims that the audit of votes did not meet state law.
- Status: Dismissed.
Maricopa County Superior Court: In Trump v. Hobbs, the Trump campaign claimed that using Sharpies to fill in mail-in ballots caused an overvote and invalidated ballots.
- Status: Dismissed.
Nevada
Clark County District Court: In Election Integrity Project v. Nevada, the plaintiffs claimed that Nevada’s vote-by-mail structure is unconstitutional. The suit was filed in September.
- Status: Active.
1st Judicial District Court, Carson City: In Law v. Whitmer, Trump’s six electors claimed irregularities, including the improper use of scanning machines to verify signatures.
- Status: Active.
U.S. District Court: In Stokke v. Cegavske, the plaintiffs sought to stop the use of automated signature matching in Clark County.
- Status: Withdrawn.
Nevada Supreme Court: In Kraus v. Cegavske, the Trump campaign, the Nevada GOP and a Republican voter and count-watcher named Fred Kraus sued to stop the use of automated signature matching.
- Status: Dismissed. The parties reached an agreement to allow for more observers.
Clark County District Court: In Becker v. Gloria, April Becker, a state Senate candidate, challenged the use of automated systems to match mail-in ballot signatures and the mailing of ballots to all registered voters.
- Status: Active.
Clark County District Court: In Marchant v. Gloria, Jim Marchant, a congressional candidate, challenged the use of automated systems for signature-matching and for mailing ballots to all registered voters.
- Status: Active.
Clark County District Court: In Rodimer v. Gloria, Daniel Rodimer, a state legislative candidate, challenged the use of automated systems for signature-matching and mailing ballots to all registered voters.
- Status: Active.
Georgia
U.S. District Court, Northern District: In Wood v. Raffensperger, an Atlanta lawyer and Trump supporter sought an injunction to prevent a statewide canvass, arguing that a consent decree wrongly imposes an invalid procedure to verify voter signatures.
- Status: Dismissed.
U.S. District Court, Southern District: In Brooks v. Mahoney, four Republican voters claimed that a voting machine software glitch caused a miscounting of votes.
- Status: Dismissed.
Chatham County Superior Court: The Georgia Republican Party and the Trump campaign sought a reminder that mail-in ballots arriving late would not be counted.
- Status: Dismissed.
Minnesota
Minnesota Supreme Court: In Kistner v. Simon, several Republican candidates make generalized claims of voting irregularities. The lawsuit was filed on Wednesday and sought to block the state’s certification of votes until an audit of the returns could be completed.
- Status: Active.
Source:
