Hello, Pennsylvania!

It feels so much like court news keeps raining down in Pennsylvania this week that you’d be forgiven for thinking we’ve gone back in time to just before the 2024 election. But don’t worry, I will be your guide breaking it down.

First, the legal elephant in the room is the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling on Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. The quick summary is that it will make it harder to challenge political maps on the grounds that they are racially discriminatory. Read more about the decision from our national team here. But for Pennsylvania, Section 2 historically hasn’t been much of an issue. Maps here, for the most part, haven't faced challenges on being illegal racial gerrymanders. That doesn’t mean the ruling won’t have an effect on Pennsylvania, though, our experts say. Learn more about it here.

Next, the story we’ve been teasing on a court case involving a directive from the Department of State published last Thursday. A commissioner from Potter County says, contrary to the law, the department is requiring him to approve voter registration applications even when there is a mismatch between the personal information they provide and government databases. The department is saying all that county officials are required to do an investigation into the mismatch, and then they can reject the application if it can’t be resolved. But the Potter commissioner says that's a retcon of what’s actually written in the directive. Read about the dispute here.

On Tuesday, I scooped a story about how much the Department of State has been spending on its project to upgrade the state’s voter management system. The bill has already reached over $1 million, but we know less about what’s happening with the project this time than during the last effort to reform the dated program. Under the previous contract, the public had access to a clear timeline of the project’s goals and deliverables. This time? The department won’t release that information, and it isn’t saying much about where things stand. Read the story here.

But wait! There’s more! Two important investigations saw movement this past week. First, the state’s auditor general revealed that his audit of the state’s motor voter process found the program works properly, although it has some process issues, including one that allowed a single noncitizen to register. Get the full details here. Next, the attorney general announced that the organizer of a 2024 voter registration drive — which resulted in hundreds of potentially fraudulent voter registration applications being submitted across the state — pleaded guilty to related misdemeanor charges. Read that story here.

"Citizens should be entitled to expect their legislators to address and account for advances in voting technologies more frequently than on a centennial basis."

This week’s quote comes to us from Pennsylvania Supreme Court Justice David Wecht. I guess election officials aren’t the only ones who wish the legislature would update the state’s election code to reflect the reality of the 21st century. 

His comment came as part of a concurring opinion in a case that determined counties must release cast vote records to the public. More to come on that soon. 

I got this question in my inbox this week about the 2024 voter registration case, and I thought it was worth answering publicly to clear up any confusion.

Q: Of the fraudulent registrations discovered, was there a clear partisan effort evident?Did [AG] Sunday report how many fraudulent registrations were R, D, or something other?

The answer is no, Attorney General Sunday did not give a breakdown of how many of the suspected fraudulent registrations were for each party. But he has clearly said this wasn’t a partisan effort. Here is a line from the criminal complaint for the man who pleaded guilty this week:

“The investigation found no evidence that Sainz’s actions, or the operation he managed, intended to affect the election or voter rolls for any political purpose, or to the benefit of any political party or candidate.”

It’s also important to note that officials have said that no fraudulent applications resulted in someone getting on the rolls. These were just applications to register, and only those for qualified voters were approved.

What else should I look into? You can always reach me by email at [email protected], on X @ByCarterWalker, or on Bluesky @bycarterwalker.bsky.social.

And if you know someone who might be interested in our reporting on elections and voting throughout Pennsylvania, forward them this newsletter — they can sign up for it here.

Looking for your next read? Check out these other great newsletters.