Case: United States v. State of California

This is a case alleging that the state of California violated the Military and Overseas Voter Empowerment Act by failing to provide adequate policies for overseas ballots. 

This action was brought on May 25, 2012, by the United States Attorney General against the State of California and the California Secretary of State in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California before Judge William B. Shubb. Plaintiff sued the defendants to enforce the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act (UOCAVA) of 1986, 42 U.S.C. §§ 1973ff to 1973ff-7, as amended by the Military and Overseas Voter Empowerment Act (“MOVE Act”) of 2009, Pub. L. No. 111-84, Subtitle H, §§ 575-589, 123 Stat. 2190, 2318-35 (2009). Under UOCAVA, states must provide access to absentee voting for members of the military and citizens abroad. A state must deliver absentee ballots to all voters who request an absentee ballot under UOCAVA at least forty-five days prior to federal elections, so long as the request was submitted at least forty-five days prior to the election. Ballots could be delivered by mail or email. The plaintiff alleged that defendants failed to implement adequate policies and procedures to ensure that voters who requested absentee ballots under UOCAVA received the ballots forty-five or more days in advance of the 2012 Federal Primary Elections in California. In total, eleven counties in California transmitted 8,249 ballots to voters after the statutory deadline for delivery had passed.

On May 30, 2012, Judge Shubb entered a consent decree negotiated by the parties. The order required the defendant Secretary of State to issue a directive instructing elections officials in several affected counties to provide for free express delivery services for absentee voters under UOCAVA and to make contact with these voters to explain their options to ensure their ballots are successfully counted. The order also required the defendant Secretary of State to create a system to ensure ballots were properly counted if a voter received a second absentee ballot by mistake. The order also required the defendant Secretary of State to conduct reporting on the number of ineligible ballots received from UOCAVA voters due to receiving them after the deadline for the June 2012 primary election. Lastly, the order required the defendant Secretary of State to establish and implement procedures in every county to ensure compliance with UOCAVA, to train elections officials, and to ensure accurate record keeping of UOCAVA compliance and procedures. The consent decree and its monitoring requirements lasted until the consent decree expired December 31, 2014. On July 30, 2012, the parties stipulated that the consent decree fully remedied the issues, and that the defendant State of California was not a party to the decree as it only applied to the defendant Secretary of State.

The case is now closed.