Michigan lawmakers are poised to empower Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson—a Democrat who has faced six separate court orders to enforce election laws—to have more control over elections.
A package of four bills dubbed the Michigan Voting Rights Act cleared the Democrat-controlled state Senate and awaits action by the Democrat-controlled state House of Representatives.
Critics say the legislation would strip the state Legislature and Michigan’s local governments of authority to regulate voting.
“They are systematically moving power away from local election clerks—who are not partisan but are hard workers—and up to the state,” state Sen. Ruth Johnson, a Republican and former Michigan secretary of state, told The Daily Signal.
Under Benson, the state voter registration rolls have 106% of the voting-age population of Michigan, Johnson said, arguing that Benson is an “operative for the far Left.”
“She is the most partisan secretary of state in my lifetime,” Johnson said. “I prided myself on bringing both sides to the table in overseeing elections.”
Michigan—which Republican Donald Trump won in the 2016 election and Democrat Joe Biden won in the 2020 election—is one of the most hotly contested and closely watched states in the 2024 presidential race.
Benson formerly worked for the far-left Southern Poverty Law Center as well as the Democratic National Committee. She was the founder of an activist group called the Michigan Center for Election Law and Administration.
Pure Integrity Michigan Elections, an elections watchdog group, points to six occasions over the past four years in which state and federal courts ruled against Benson in election law cases:
—In July, in the case of Republican National Committee v. Benson, Michigan Court of Claims Judge Christopher Yates ruled against the secretary of state’s policy of presuming voters’ signatures were valid. The RNC brought the case in March regarding Benson’s December 2023 instructions to election clerks to presume the validity of absentee voters’ signatures. The RNC argued that the instructions violated the Michigan Constitution, which requires verification of signatures.
—In October 2022, in the case of O’Halloran v. Benson, Michigan Court of Appeals Judge Brock Swartzle ordered Benson to revise her rules governing poll watchers’ guidelines to comply with Michigan election law. Benson’s rules limited when poll watchers could make a challenge and also banned electronic devices. Swartzle determined that Benson did not go through proper procedures. However, the Michigan Supreme Court, in a 4-3 ruling, last month sided with Benson and reversed lower court rulings.
—In March 2021, Benson lost in the case of Genetski v. Benson when a judge struck down her October 2020 guidance regarding standards for voter signatures. Michigan Court of Appeals Judge Christopher Murray’s ruling said Benson violated the Administrative Standards Act. Benson’s guidance was put in place before the November 2020 election. The court ruling only affected elections going forward.
—In October 2020, in the case of Davis v. Benson, Murray issued an injunction against Benson’s directive banning the open carry of firearms at polling places.
—In 2020, in the case of Carra v. Benson, Michigan Court of Appeals Judge Cynthia Stephens issued a preliminary injunction against Benson’s directive restricting poll watchers and election challengers. (Poll watchers observe voting; election challengers observe the count.) The litigation was related to requirements for social distancing during the COVID-19 pandemic. Days before the 2020 election, Benson’s office settled the lawsuit, which was brought by state House candidate Steve Carra, a Republican, to allow poll watchers and election challengers to be within six feet of election workers.
—In the case of Johnson v. Benson in October 2020, U.S. District Judge Paul Maloney ordered Benson to change her guidance on the time and manner of election processes to comply with state law on the deadline for the arrival of absentee ballots.
—On the most recent front, in a pending case, the Republican National Committee sued Benson over her instructions to local clerks and election inspectors to process and count ballots with numbers that don’t match those in the poll book or the return envelope. Republicans alleged that this procedure violated Michigan law requiring matching numbers on the ballot, poll book, and ballot return envelope to ensure that ballots were cast and counted properly.
Earlier this month, testifying with other secretaries of state before the House Administration Committee in Washington, Benson said unsubstantiated rhetoric can “harm those charged with protecting our election systems.”
However, Patrice Johnson, who chairs Pure Integrity Michigan Elections, said Benson hasn’t demonstrated evidence that election workers face threats of violence.
Benson also has tried to intimidate both election watchdogs and local election officials, said Johnson, who is not related to Ruth Johnson.
“Her behavior is reminiscent of Gestapo tactics, designed to intimidate and silence opposition,” PIME’s Johnson told The Daily Signal. “No one who values free speech and the Constitution of the United States—or who respects her constituents—would trample on individual rights in this arrogant and self-aggrandizing manner.”
The PIMI chair pointed to Benson’s words during an online question-and-answer session last month.
“If someone were to violate the law, and not certify the election at the local level, we will come for you,” Benson said of local election officials. “So, any local certifier thinking of skirting the law and not certifying the vote, don’t even think about it, because we’ll get you.”
The legislative package touted by Benson as the Michigan Voting Rights Act is made up of four separate bills.
Senate Bill 401 would allow court-appointed monitors to oversee elections for up to 10 years. Critics say it would pave the way for the process known as ranked choice voting. SB 402 would establish a private “institute” outside a government entity for collecting election data.
SB 403 would mandate language assistance for elections, which critics say would create heavy costs for elections offices. Finally, SB 404 would legalize electioneering near voting locations, which critics say could jeopardize the secret ballot.
Benson’s office has argued that the legislative package would “prohibit voter denial, dilution, and suppression” and “enhance and clarify protections for voters with disabilities or others who need assistance to participate in elections.”
A spokesperson for the Michigan Department of State did not respond to inquiries from The Daily Signal for this story. But in a public statement last week, Benson touted the Michigan Senate’s passage of the legislation
“Every Michigan voter deserves access to fair, secure elections and no citizen should be unfairly denied the right to vote,” Benson said. “The Michigan Voting Rights Act will not only build on the federal Voting Rights Act but will add new protections at the state level to shield us from future attacks on our democracy.”
The Public Interest Legal Foundation sued Michigan over Benson’s refusal to remove the names of 26,000 dead people from voter registration lists. Of those, almost 4,000 had been dead for over two decades; 17,479 were dead for more than a decade; 23,663 had been dead for at least five years.
The foundation, an election watchdog group, noted that Benson’s department mismanaged voter rolls. She publicly defended her office, however.
