The Wisconsin Supreme Court has stated that it will decide on the legality of mobile voting sites after a circuit judge ruled in January that the city’s use of a mobile van for absentee voting violated state law.
This stems from a lawsuit filed by the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty, a nonprofit conservative law firm, on behalf of Racine County Republican Party Chairman Ken Brown following the 2022 primary.
The suit contends that using the “election van” as an alternate absentee ballot site violated state law. The locations visited by the van provided an advantage to citizens affiliated with the Democratic Party or those who have a history of voting for the party.
Racine City Clerk Tara McMenamin and the Democratic National Committee—both named as defendants in the lawsuit—had requested that the state Supreme Court review the case directly, without allowing any lower appellate courts to rule on it first.
Chief Justice Annette Ziegler, a member of the conservative block, wrote in the order that “bypass cannot be properly analyzed” when the case is still “underdeveloped for our review.”
“This case should proceed in accordance with usual process. Instead, even though it is not ready for review, this case sidesteps process to be taken out of turn and advanced to the front of the line,” the justice said.
“Not only are the issues and arguments unknown and briefing notably absent, but at the earliest, oral argument for this matter cannot be scheduled until fall 2024.”
Judge Gasiorkiewicz said that although state law does not expressly forbid the use of mobile voting vans, it also does not explicitly authorize their use.
“The absence of an express prohibition, however, does not mean mobile absentee ballot sites comport to procedures specified in the election laws,” the judge wrote in a 17-page ruling.
The van was purchased with grant money that the city of Racine received from the Center for Tech and Civic Life, the nonprofit funded by Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg and his wife.
It was sent to nearly two dozen sites in the two weeks before the primary, where it would stop by for several hours of in-person absentee voting before moving to another site over the course of two weeks.
However, plaintiffs have argued that the van was only sent to Democrat areas in the city and claimed that it increased the chances of voter fraud.
