Courts Play Major Role in Election Outcomes in Battleground States

State high courts issue thousands of opinions each year, and these decisions can have major impacts on public policy. To help you keep track of consequential judicial decisions and their impact on state policy, MultiState publishes the Monthly Court Report, which offers a monthly recap of notable state high court decisions to provide a more dynamic picture of public policy trends.

Courts Play Major Role in Election Outcomes in Battleground States

Last month, state supreme courts again waded into the election fray, releasing major decisions regarding voting in two swing states: Georgia and Pennsylvania. Although both states were won by President Biden in 2020, the margins were extremely thin. In Pennsylvania, only 80,555 votes, approximately 1.2% of all votes cast in the state, determined the winner. In Georgia, the difference was even narrower with Biden receiving just 11,779 (0.2%) more votes than Trump. Since polls indicate that voters are just as divided this time around, these recent court decisions could play a major factor in determining the next President of the United States.

Georgia

After membership to the State Election Board shifted in favor of Republicans in May 2024, the Board passed a number of controversial rules addressing a variety of topics related to election monitoring and reporting. Among other permissions, these rules allowed election workers to engage in a “reasonable inquiry” before certifying elections and granted election officials the ability to examine a wide breadth of election documentation. The rules also required all votes to go through a hand-count verification process. Plaintiffs challenged the legitimacy of these rules, arguing that not only did the Election Board exceed its powers in their passage, but that the rules violated various voting laws. In two separate rulings, the Fulton County Superior Court held that the rules were unconstitutional over-extensions of the Board’s authority, and therefore, invalid. Both of these decisions were reached in mid-October, causing the Republican National Committee (RNC) to ask the Georgia Supreme Court to temporarily block the judgment while an appeal is considered and/or expedite the appeal itself before the November election. On October 22, however, the state supreme court issued a brief order rejecting the RNC motions, and therefore, preventing the new election rules from being enforced this November 5. 

Pennsylvania

Pennsylvania’s Supreme Court revisited questions regarding the state’s mail-in ballot system in a case that threatened to discount thousands of submitted “naked” ballots. Pennsylvania requires that mail-in ballots be returned properly enclosed in a provided secrecy envelope, and in 2020, the state supreme court ruled that ballots that did not comply with this requirement (“naked ballots”) could not be counted. Last month, however, in the final weeks of the election, the state supreme court broke partially with its previous ruling and held that voters who submit mail-in ballots that are rejected for procedural violations may still cast provisional ballots. These provisional ballots will be counted after a voter’s registration is confirmed. While data regarding the number of “naked ballots” received each election is sparse, some reports suggest that the amount is significant. In Philadelphia’s general election in 2019, over 6% of absentee ballots were returned without their secrecy envelopes. In a close race, these votes could be more than enough to affect the outcome in 2024. 

Flow of Cases Show No Sign of Slowing

Almost 100 lawsuits regarding voting rights are still pending across the battleground states, and as demonstrated by Georgia and Pennsylvania, their decisions and the speed at which they are reached have the potential to make a huge impact on the election’s results. These cases are surely just the beginning of what promises to be an extremely litigious election cycle that will extend long after the polls close. 

Other Key October Decisions 

Alabama

The Alabama Supreme Court ruled that a hospital was immune from wrongful death claims regarding the 2020 death of a COVID-19 patient. The Court asserted that the 2021 Alabama Covid Immunity Act provided liability protections that applied retroactively to the case. Read more.

Arizona

Arizona’s Supreme Court upheld a lower court ruling permitting Proposition 140 to remain on the November ballot. Proposition 140 asks voters to determine whether to replace their partisan primaries with nonpartisan open primaries. Opponents of the proposition had alleged that proponents had not collected enough valid signatures to qualify the measure to be placed on the ballot. Read more.

Florida

The Florida Supreme Court unanimously sided with Governor Ron DeSantis in a criminal case accusing DeSantis and other officials of abusing their power to influence the vote on the state’s proposed abortion-rights amendment by including language on the state health agency stating that the amendment “threatens women’s safety.” The Court held that the petitioner, as a private citizen, did not have standing to bring the claim. Read more.

Georgia

The Georgia Supreme Court ruled that the state’s six-week abortion ban would remain in effect during the ongoing litigation regarding the legality of the law. The Court, however, did continue a block on provisions within the law that granted prosecutors access to abortion patient medical records without due process. Read more.

Hawaii

Hawaii’s Supreme Court determined that insurers of an oil company were under no obligation to reimburse the entity for legal fees associated with the defense of the company against claims that they promoted misinformation regarding fossil fuels' relationship to climate change. The Court asserted that since “greenhouse gasses” are a pollutant, the claim was not covered under the insurance policies. Read more.

Illinois

The Illinois Supreme Court found that broad immunity applied to health care facilities during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Court asserted that the governor’s disaster declaration clearly limited health care liability to instances of willful misconduct and excluded all ordinary negligence. Read more.

Kansas

Kansas’ Supreme Court concluded that the Kansas Workers Compensation Fund was liable for injuries sustained by a nurse working out-of-state in Montana. In this case, a nurse was injured in Montana while working in Montana for a company based in Montana. The Court held that the Kansas fund was responsible because the nurse’s employment began in Kansas where she signed her employment contract. Read more

Maryland

The Maryland Supreme Court determined that a ballot amendment regarding the development of the downtown Haborplace does not violate the state constitution and may move forward to the November election. Opponents had argued that the amendment language was confusing. Read more. 

Massachusetts

In a 5-1 vote, Massachusetts’s Supreme Court ruled that the state Wiretap Act did not prohibit website operators from collecting user browsing information without their consent. The Court determined that although the Act did cover eavesdropping, as well as electronic forms of communication, browsing information did not involve the necessary person-to-person contact to trigger the protections under the law. Read more.

Minnesota

Minnesota’s Supreme Court ordered that a man convicted of murdering his stepbrother’s attacker was entitled to a new trial, finding that the original trial court improperly applied the duty to retreat to the “defense-of-others” claim. The Court held that, in some cases, it would be permissible for an individual defending another to use deadly force despite an ability to retreat. Read more.

Montana

Montana’s Supreme Court reaffirmed a lower court’s temporary block of several sets of abortion bills. The first set sought to restrict abortions in regard to Medicaid. The second set of bills required ultrasounds prior to abortions and outlawed a common abortion procedure after 15 weeks. Read more.

Nebraska

Nebraska’s Supreme Court upheld a law eliminating a two-year waiting period for felons to have their voting rights restored. While a win for voting rights advocates, the timing of the decision left a slim margin of time in which affected citizens could register to vote. Read more.

New Mexico

The New Mexico Supreme Court held that the state could be held liable after an inmate was mistakenly released from prison and subsequently committed murder. The Court determined that governmental immunity laws do not cover the negligent release of prisoners. Read more.

Ohio

Ohio’s Supreme Court upheld a directive from the Secretary of State that required individuals returning absentee ballots on behalf of a family member or disabled voter to not only complete certain paperwork but also prohibit the return of the ballot to a drop box. The Court, however, did not address the merits of the case, and instead, asserted that the claim was barred due to “laches,” a legal principle barring actions where a right is asserted after an unreasonable delay and would cause harm if upheld. The Court held that challengers to the Directive filed their claim too late under these standards. Read more.