Former President Donald Trump and his fellow Republicans seem to be preparing for potential legal battles regarding the 2024 election results if Trump does not win, mirroring their strategy from the 2020 election. The Republican National Committee (RNC) has already launched over 100 lawsuits focused on the same claims Trump made previously, including the counting of questionable mail-in ballots and inadequate protections against noncitizens participating in elections.

Through a program known as “Protect the Vote,” the RNC has claimed to have enlisted 200,000 poll watchers and assembled “aggressive attorneys” to monitor the election process. They have also set up a hotline dedicated to election integrity, with attorneys tasked with overseeing various aspects, including the testing of voting machines, early voting, Election Day procedures, handling mail ballots, and conducting post-election audits and recounts.

The over 60 lawsuits filed by Trump and his allies in 2020, which ultimately were unsuccessful, provide a glimpse into how he could attempt to challenge a loss this time around.

This year, Republicans have raised concerns about insufficient measures in three key states to prevent noncitizens from voting or to manage incorrectly filled absentee ballots. (It’s important to note that noncitizens are legally prohibited from voting in federal elections.)

Despite polls indicating a tight race, Trump insists the only way he could face defeat on November 5 is due to election fraud. He has expressed that he is closely monitoring the election due to his claims of “widespread cheating” from the previous election, as stated in a post on Truth Social from September 17. The following day, he made unsubstantiated claims that Democrats were registering tens of thousands of illegal voters.

Trump has not guaranteed that he will accept the results of the forthcoming election. He told the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, “If everything’s honest, I’d gladly accept the results. If it’s not, you have to fight for the country’s right.”

This approach is not new for Trump. He previously refrained from committing to concede if he lost to Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton in 2016. His campaign unfolded on similar lines, with him filing lawsuits on Election Day that year and spreading claims of electoral fraud through the “Stop the Steal” movement, which resurfaced in 2020.

Judicial responses to 2020 election fraud allegations were overwhelmingly dismissive. The U.S. Supreme Court rejected Trump’s cases outright, and a Michigan federal judge described one lawsuit as “a historic and profound abuse of the judicial process.” Lawmakers in Arizona mocked the lack of evidence presented by Trump’s attorney, Rudy Giuliani. Additionally, Dominion Voting Systems reached a $787 million settlement with Fox News over false accusations made by Trump and his supporters regarding the manipulation of voting machines.

Regardless of these setbacks, Trump is known for relentlessly pursuing legal action and is likely to do so again.

“Pointing to court battles gives an illusion of legitimacy,” suggested Sean Morales-Doyle, director of voting rights at the Brennan Center for Justice. “It sets the stage for later questioning of election outcomes, fostering distrust while creating a basis to refer back to when there’s dissatisfaction with results.”

Changes made since 2020 might reduce the likelihood of lawsuits. Congress has attempted to limit challenges to election results by revising the outdated Electoral Count Act, which dictates how presidential votes are counted. Additionally, some attorneys may hesitate to take on election-related cases due to the criminal charges and sanctions faced by several of Trump’s legal representatives.

The Trump campaign did not provide a comment on the matter.

The RNC informed YSL News that by mid-September, it had initiated 119 lawsuits concerning election integrity across 25 states. The organization’s goals include ensuring that legitimate votes are cast and counted correctly. The lawsuits thus far have addressed various issues, but there has been a strong focus on preventing noncitizens from voting and ensuring the proper casting of mail-in ballots.

“We are dedicated to the fundamental principle — and common-sense law — that only Americans decide American elections,” RNC Chair Michael Whatley stated after filing consecutive lawsuits in North Carolina related to citizenship issues.

Republican and Conservative Lawsuits Found Lacking Evidence

Investigators from Republican federal and state election offices discovered no significant fraud during the 2020 elections. Back then, Attorney General Bill Barr described Trump’s numerous claims as “nonsense” and “absolute rubbish.”

Rusty Bowers, a former GOP House Speaker in Arizona, recounted Giuliani’s words: “We have plenty of theories, but we lack evidence.”

Trump has incorrectly asserted that his past legal battles were dismissed due to “technicalities” without considering their substance. However, a report titled “Lost Not Stolen” by a group of respected conservative legal scholars revealed that judges dismissed 30 claims of fraud and wrongdoing presented by Trump and his supporters after conducting evidentiary hearings.

Judges from across the political spectrum—both state and federal, including some appointed by Trump—turned down lawsuits that contested the election results. For instance, a federal judge in Michigan criticized one case as filled with “speculation, conjecture, and unwarranted suspicion.” Additionally, a Trump-appointed federal judge in Wisconsin ruled against a lawsuit seeking to empower the legislature to appoint new presidential electors, stating he “lost on the merits.”

“In 2020 and afterward, I’ve not seen any indication that any court was biased toward a presidential candidate,” stated Justin Levitt, a Loyola Law School professor. “I haven’t seen a single judge say, ‘Just send me a case and I will magically change the outcome.’”

What Issues Are Republicans Expected to Challenge in 2024?

Despite the absence of reliable evidence from four years ago, attorneys indicate that Trump’s election-related lawsuits this year might target the following claims:

• Issues with absentee ballots, such as missing signatures or dates.
• Voting by ineligible individuals, such as noncitizens or convicted felons.
• Incorrect counting of ballots.
• Blocking of observers from overseeing vote counting.

Rick Hasen, an election law professor at UCLA who monitors election litigation, mentioned that this year’s lawsuits seem “less serious” compared to 2020 when litigants contested pandemic-related changes to election protocols. He noted that GOP lawsuits this year questioning absentee ballots that are postmarked by Election Day but received afterward have consistently been upheld by the courts.

“Much of the current litigation is less significant, often relying on less plausible theories,” Hasen remarked.

The window for challenging election results is narrow. The Electoral College is set to vote on December 17, about six weeks after the election on November 5.

Lawsuits may be filed in either state or federal courts based on where litigators feel they may have an advantage. The state Supreme Courts in Arizona and Georgia are predominantly conservative, while Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin have slightly more liberal majorities. The U.S. Supreme Court maintains a 6-3 conservative balance, with three justices appointed by Trump and one by Biden.

Focus on Mail-In Voting

Mail-in voting has seen significant growth, particularly among Democrats. According to data from the U.S. Election Assistance Commission, more than 43% of voters cast their ballots by mail in 2020, a notable increase from 24.5% in 2016. Surveys indicated that approximately 60% of Democrats opted for mail-in voting in 2020, compared to 32% of Republicans.

Republicans are likely to seek to disallow the counting of ballots received late or those not meeting requirements such as signature or date, especially if the election in a key state has a close outcome.

On September 13, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court upheld legislation that prevents election officials from counting mail-in ballots that lack a date. During the April primary, numerous ballots were discarded due to missing or incorrectly dated return envelopes in a state Biden narrowly won by about 80,000 votes in 2020.

A court had previously ruled in August that rejecting undated ballots from otherwise eligible voters in the regions around Philadelphia and Pittsburgh would infringe upon their voting rights. However, Republicans appealed and won a ruling enforcing strict adherence to state law, which Whatley at the RNC described as “a significant victory” in a “vitally important” state.

Lawsuits Target Noncitizens, But Evidence of Illegal Voting Is Minimal

Republicans have initiated multiple lawsuits aimed at stopping noncitizens from casting votes. However, experts who focus on election integrity report that the actual issue is nearly nonexistent, noting only 30 instances of noncitizens voting among 23 million ballots cast across 42 jurisdictions, as per a study by the Brennan Center for Justice.

Current lawsuits from the Republican National Committee related to citizenship include:

In key battleground states like Nevada and North Carolina, Republican claims argue that these states are not performing adequate citizenship checks during voter registration processes. In Arizona, the state Supreme Court reinstated a Republican-supported law on August 22 requiring voters to show proof of citizenship when they register using a state form; however, registration is still possible via federal forms.

Despite the focus on the issue, statistics reveal that very few noncitizens actually participate in voting, likely because they are aware that doing so could expose them to criminal charges and potential deportation. A 2020 study by the libertarian Cato Institute concluded that “noncitizens don’t illegally vote in detectable numbers.”

“There has been a significant amount of exaggerated concern regarding the issue of noncitizens voting,” stated Levitt.

Legal Charges and Sanctions May Deter Some Lawsuits

Attorneys have ethical responsibilities as court officers and must avoid providing false information in their arguments, with potential criminal charges for fraud or dishonesty.

In Georgia, Trump’s attorneys, including Rudy Giuliani and Jenna Ellis, have faced federal charges related to a plot to overturn the election, which involved unfounded claims that thousands of ineligible voters cast ballots in the state in 2020.

Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger testified before Congress, stating that investigators discovered only four ballots supposedly cast by deceased individuals, no ballots from underage voters, and fewer than 74 votes from those on felony sentences.

Trump’s legal team has also faced charges in Arizona and many have encountered disbarment proceedings in various states, with some fined in Michigan.

Observers of election procedures suggest that these sanctions may make some lawyers think twice about pursuing such cases – though not all of them will be deterred.

“There will certainly be lawyers willing to engage,” said Hans von Spakovsky, an election authority from the conservative Heritage Foundation. “However, some attorneys, especially in larger firms, may hesitate to take risks given the consequences others have faced.”

He described the charges and disciplinary actions against lawyers as “a gross misuse of the legal system” and “quite unjust.”

“Those attorneys were simply fulfilling their duties under the professional standards, which require them to advocate vigorously for their clients,” von Spakovsky asserted.

Sidney Powell, a lawyer for Trump, faced charges and sanctions for making baseless claims of widespread fraud and seeking to have judges overturn election results.

“What we should expect to see are more cautious and well-supported lawsuits moving forward,” noted Tim Parlatore, a former Trump attorney who was not involved in the election-related legal battles. “The key issue with the fraud lawsuits in 2020 was that they were overreaching.”

Parlatore suggested that a more effective approach would have been to litigate for the government to provide evidence, such as questionable ballots or recordings of poll watchers obstructed from monitoring ballot counts, and then seek to invalidate results based on that evidence.

“Had they adopted this strategy, it would likely have gained much more support,” Parlatore concluded.

Congress Revised the Electoral Count Act to Deter Legal Challenges Over Fake Electors

In an effort to minimize lawsuits, Congress has amended the confusing 1877 Electoral Count Act. The outdated law previously left room for the interpretation that state legislatures could replace Democratic electors with Republicans in states won by Biden.

Electors from four Republican states—Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, and Nevada—are facing legal charges for submitting false documents. Trump’s supporters contend these electors were prepared if he succeeded in challenging court rulings.

To combat this tactic, Congress has made it more difficult for lawmakers to dispute electors during the vote count set for January 6, 2025. The new regulations also name a single official, typically the governor, as responsible for filing each state’s official electoral vote certificates.

These updates were intended to deter lawsuits aiming to alter electors. However, the idea of nominating alternate electors remains a possible focus for this year’s legal actions.

Senator J.D. Vance, R-Ohio, who is also Trump’s running mate, stated on the All-In podcast on September 10 that he would have voted to allow states to present alternate elector slates back in 2020. In contrast, former Representative Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., labeled his position as “illegal and unconstitutional.”