Main Menu

State, Office of the Lieutenant Governor v. Arctic Village Council

ELECTION LAW

Sloane Bessey

In State, Office of the Lieutenant Governor v. Arctic Village Council, 495 P.3d 313 (Alaska 2021), the supreme court held that the health concerns of the pandemic outweighed the State interests behind the witness requirement for absentee ballots in elections. (Id. at 325–26). There is an Alaska statute that requires that absentee voters have an official or, if that is not possible, a person above 18 years old witness absentee ballots. (Id. at 315–16). The Arctic Village Council, the League of Women Voters, and two individuals filed suit on September 8, 2020, asking for a preliminary injunction among other relief from the requirement. (Id. at 316–17). They alleged that enforcing the witness requirement during the COVID-19 pandemic would violate the constitutional right of voters to equal protection of the laws as well as the right to vote. (Id. at 317). The State argued that either laches barred the suit or that the preliminary injunction standards were not met due the State’s interest in deterring fraud and promoting voter confidence in the integrity of the election. (Id. at 318). The superior court granted the preliminary injunction and the state appealed to the Alaska supreme court. (Id. at 318-19). The supreme court agreed with the superior court that laches did not bar the claim, because the pandemic was constantly shifting, and the injunction would not subject the State to unduly burdensome requirements. (Id. at 321). The supreme court also affirmed the superior court’s findings that the State’s reasons behind the witness requirement, deterring fraud and increasing voter confidence in elections, were not effective enough to outweigh the burden put on voters due to the pandemic and that, therefore, a preliminary injunction was a proper remedy. (Id. at 322–25). The supreme court affirmed the superior court’s decision to grant a preliminary injunction, holding that the health concerns of the pandemic outweighed the state interests behind the witness requirement for absentee ballots in elections. (Id. at 325–26).

State, Office of the Lieutenant Governor v. Arctic Village Council

ELECTION LAW

Sloane Bessey

In State, Office of the Lieutenant Governor v. Arctic Village Council, 495 P.3d 313 (Alaska 2021), the supreme court held that the health concerns of the pandemic outweighed the State interests behind the witness requirement for absentee ballots in elections. (Id. at 325–26). There is an Alaska statute that requires that absentee voters have an official or, if that is not possible, a person above 18 years old witness absentee ballots. (Id. at 315–16). The Arctic Village Council, the League of Women Voters, and two individuals filed suit on September 8, 2020, asking for a preliminary injunction among other relief from the requirement. (Id. at 316–17). They alleged that enforcing the witness requirement during the COVID-19 pandemic would violate the constitutional right of voters to equal protection of the laws as well as the right to vote. (Id. at 317). The State argued that either laches barred the suit or that the preliminary injunction standards were not met due the State’s interest in deterring fraud and promoting voter confidence in the integrity of the election. (Id. at 318). The superior court granted the preliminary injunction and the state appealed to the Alaska supreme court. (Id. at 318-19). The supreme court agreed with the superior court that laches did not bar the claim, because the pandemic was constantly shifting, and the injunction would not subject the State to unduly burdensome requirements. (Id. at 321). The supreme court also affirmed the superior court’s findings that the State’s reasons behind the witness requirement, deterring fraud and increasing voter confidence in elections, were not effective enough to outweigh the burden put on voters due to the pandemic and that, therefore, a preliminary injunction was a proper remedy. (Id. at 322–25). The supreme court affirmed the superior court’s decision to grant a preliminary injunction, holding that the health concerns of the pandemic outweighed the state interests behind the witness requirement for absentee ballots in elections. (Id. at 325–26).