PILF Client Demands Court Action Against Virginia Plan to Accept Ballots Without Postmarks

Published On: October 13th, 2020

Seeks Injunction to Enforce Specific Virginia Law Requiring Postmark

(ALEXANDRIA, VA.) – October 13, 2020: The Public Interest Legal Foundation (PILF) filed, on behalf of Thomas Reed, a local electoral board member, a lawsuit against the Virginia Department of Elections and the State Board seeking an injunction against new administrative guidance that would accept absentee ballots received within three days after Election Day despite missing or illegible postmarks. Such guidance stands in stark violation of a Virginia statute signed into law on March 11, 2020 (Reed v. Virginia Dept. of Elections).

Existing Virginia statute (24.2-709) is clear: “any absentee ballot returned to the general registrar after the closing of the polls on election day but before noon on the third day after the election and postmarked on or before the date of the election shall be counted…” (emphasis added).

The defendants’ guidance to local election boards on August 4, 2020, stands contrary to Virginia law, particularly allowing ballots received within the Election Day plus-3 window even if they do not “have a postmark, or the postmark is missing or illegible.”

Mr. Reed has a straightforward request. Follow the law,” PILF President and General Counsel J. Christian Adams said.

The plaintiff seeks declaratory and injunctive relief from the Circuit Court of the County of Frederick that:

  1. Instructions issued by the defendants conflict with specific Virginia statute;
  2. A postmark dated on or before Election Day be required for acceptance;
  3. The Intelligent Mail Barcode system by the USPS be used to verify date of mailing in the cases of missing or illegible postmarks; and,
  4. Enjoin the defendants from issuing any further instructions that conflict with existing Virginia statutes.

The plaintiff for this action is Thomas P. Reed, a Frederick County Board of Elections Member.

The Public Interest Legal Foundation is leading the nation in enforcing election integrity laws and the National Voter Registration Act, having brought cases in North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Maryland, Florida, Mississippi, Texas, and Maine and filed amicus briefs in litigation across the nation.

The case was filed in the Circuit Court of the County of Frederick, Virginia. The case number is 20-622. Counsel for the Public Interest Legal Foundation is J. Christian Adams. Winchester-based Phillip S. Griffin II serves as co-counsel.

Public Interest Legal Foundation (PILF) is a 501(c)(3) public interest law firm dedicated to election integrity. The Foundation exists to assist states and others to aid the cause of election integrity and fight against lawlessness in American elections. Drawing on numerous experts in the field, PILF seeks to protect the right to vote and preserve the Constitutional framework of American elections.

###

Related Posts

PILF Intervenes to Protect Georgia From DOJ Abuse of Power

PILF Intervenes to Protect Georgia From DOJ Abuse of Power

PILF is the First Group to File a Motion to Help Georgia (Alexandria, VA) – July 6, 2021: The Public Interest Legal Foundation (PILF) filed a motion to intervene to help defend Georgia’s election integrity law against the Department of Justice lawsuit. The Department...

PILF Applauds Supreme Court Decision in DNC v. Brnovich

PILF Applauds Supreme Court Decision in DNC v. Brnovich

The Court Adopts PILF’s Framing of Voting Rights Act (Alexandria, VA) – July 1, 2021: Today, the Supreme Court issued a decision on a case interpreting the Voting Rights Act, DNC v. Brnovich. In a 6-3 decision the Court ruled Arizona’s ballot harvesting and...

PILF Applauds Supreme Court Decision on Donor Privacy

PILF Applauds Supreme Court Decision on Donor Privacy

Blow to Kamala Harris’ Intrusion into Private Information (Alexandria, VA) – July 1, 2021. Today, the Supreme Court issued a decision on the donor privacy case, Americans for Prosperity Foundation and Thomas Moore Law Center v. Becerra. In a 6-3 decision, the Court...

Public Interest Legal Foundation