A new requirement in New York that will take effect this weekend is set to grant Democrat New York Attorney General Letitia James widespread power over the state’s election process. Under the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Act of New York, certain jurisdictions will be required to request preclearance from the attorney general or a designated court for election-related decisions. This includes changes such as altering the hours of early voting or culling deceased residents from voter lists. The new law has been described by election attorney Joseph T. Burns as a significant power grab by the attorney general that has not received much attention in the public discourse.
The new rule was signed into law by Gov. Kathy Hochul and will take effect on Sept. 22. Burns, who published an op-ed in the New York Post, warned that James will now have unprecedented power over election processes in key congressional districts in the state. This includes areas such as Long Island and the Hudson Valley, which are considered hotly contested. The law mandates that certain jurisdictions, including New York City and nine counties on Long Island, must seek approval from the attorney general or a designated court before making any election-related changes. The triggers that determine a “covered entity” under the law include a history of civil rights or voting rights violations in the past 25 years.
The new rule marks a significant departure from the bipartisan election administration system that has been in place in New York for generations. The requirement of obtaining approval from the attorney general or a court before making election-related changes undermines the bipartisan nature of the boards of elections in the state. Burns emphasized the importance of having both parties involved in overseeing elections to ensure fairness and integrity. The new rule gives the attorney general a partisan advantage in deciding how elections are conducted in the state, which raises concerns about the impact on voter confidence in the process.
Concerns have been raised by Burns that the new rule could cause disruptions at the polls, especially given that it will go into effect shortly before the upcoming presidential election. While local commissioners would still have the authority to choose new polling sites, they would need to obtain approval from the attorney general’s office, adding an extra layer of bureaucracy to the process. Burns argues that adding additional paperwork and clearance requirements does not necessarily improve the efficiency or integrity of the election process in New York. The current bipartisan system of election administration has been successful in maintaining voter confidence and should not be undermined by the attorney general’s new powers.
Burns highlighted the importance of preserving the bipartisan nature of elections in New York to ensure that both parties have a stake in upholding the integrity of the process. He expressed concern that the preclearance rules introduced by the state VRA could lead to increased partisan interference in election administration, possibly impacting voter confidence in the system. Despite bipartisan boards of elections not being perfect, they have been effective in maintaining voter trust in the process. Burns cautioned that the new rule granting the attorney general significant power over election processes could have unintended consequences on the public’s faith in the fairness and integrity of elections in the state.
Despite the concerns raised by Burns and others about the potential impact of the new requirement on the election process in New York, there has been limited discussion or attention given to the issue. The upcoming changes represent a significant shift in the balance of power in election administration, with the attorney general gaining unprecedented authority over key election decisions. It remains to be seen how these changes will affect the upcoming elections in New York and whether they will have a lasting impact on the integrity and fairness of the state’s electoral process.
