[EL] “ACLU Challenges New Hampshire Voter Signature-Matching Law”

[RuthAlice Anderson]

A few years back my signature did not match, I guess maybe it got wet in the mail or something. I received a letter and an email from the Elections Bureau. I called, verified that I was the person who signed my ballot. Their concern was that no one other than me signed my ballot. 

When ballots cannot be counted (people forget to sign their ballot, using address stamps instead of a signature, or sign with a different name after they get married, etc.) Elections sends a letter and if you sign up for notification, they also send an email. The letter is sent right away so you can get it fixed even before election day. You have until two weeks after the election to verify that is your ballot. All of this info comes from the outside of the envelope. They won’t open the envelope until the ballot can be counted. 

8 days after the election, those whose ballots will not be counted is also available in a database, for a processing fee, allowing candidates and organizations who are interested in making sure everyone’s vote count to call people and urge them to go verify or sign their ballots. 

http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2014/05/more_than_5000_oregon_voters_m.html <http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2014/05/more_than_5000_oregon_voters_m.html>


RuthAlice Anderson
ruthalice.anderson at icloud.com

we-resist.info <http://we-resist.info/>

tonstantweaderreviews.wordpress.com <http://tonstantweaderreviews.wordpress.com/>

singleservingrecipes.wordpress.com <http://singleservingrecipes.wordpress.com/>
> On May 11, 2017, at 8:40 AM, Kevin Benson <kbenson at allisonmackenzie.com> wrote:
> 
> Regarding the ACLU’s challenge to signature matching – isn’t it common practice in many states to use signature matching both for absentee / mail ballots, and also to sign people in at the polling location? Do most states have some kind of follow-up for ballots that are rejected? What do Oregon and Colorado do?
>  
> Should this suit succeed, presumably states would be required to implement some sort of follow-up procedures for non-matching signatures. Or perhaps it would drive states to instead try to implement some other front-end procedure, like perhaps a kind of voter pin number or something. But that could present a whole other set of problems, like how to securely deliver it, people forgetting / losing it, etc. I’m curious if other states have adopted such mechanisms. Anyone know?
>  
> Cheers,
> Kevin
>  
> From: law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu <mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu> [mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu <mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu>] On Behalf Of Rick Hasen
> Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2017 8:40 PM
> To: Election Law Listserv <law-election at uci.edu <mailto:law-election at uci.edu>>
> Subject: [EL] ELB News and Commentary 5/11/17
>  
>  
> “ACLU Challenges New Hampshire Voter Signature-Matching Law” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=92466>
> Posted on May 10, 2017 7:56 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=92466> by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
> Release: <https://www.aclu.org/news/aclu-challenges-new-hampshire-voter-signature-matching-law>
> The American Civil Liberties Union today sued New Hampshire for invalidating the absentee ballots of hundreds of voters, many of whom are disabled, without warning.
> At issue is a state law that allows election officials — who have no handwriting-analysis expertise — to reject an absentee ballot, without giving notice to the voter, if they think there is a signature mismatch in the voter’s paperwork. People with disabilities are far more likely to have fluctuating handwriting or to require the assistance of someone to sign their name, as allowed under federal disability rights law.
> <image001.png> <https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D92466&title=%E2%80%9CACLU%20Challenges%20New%20Hampshire%20Voter%20Signature-Matching%20Law%E2%80%9D>
> Posted in election administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>
>  
> 
> 
> PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL:This message originates from the law firm of Allison MacKenzie, Ltd. This message and any file(s) or attachment(s) transmitted with it are confidential and may include information subject to the attorney-client privilege, information protected by the attorney work product doctrine, or information which is otherwise proprietary, a trade secret or protected against unauthorized use or disclosure. This message and any file(s) or attachment(s) transmitted with it are transmitted based on a reasonable expectation of privacy. Any disclosure, distribution, copying, or use of this information by anyone other than the intended recipient, regardless of address or routing, is strictly prohibited. If you receive this message in error, please advise the sender by immediate reply and delete the original message. A&M-ver.-xz1.1 _______________________________________________
> Law-election mailing list
> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu <mailto:Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu>
> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election <http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20170511/0d950f52/attachment.html>