Connect with us

Hi, what are you looking for?


Wisconsin Court Shoots Down Attempt to Change Rules for Absentee Ballots Before Midterms

A Wisconsin judge on Wednesday dealt a blow to a group in the state who hoped to change rules governing absentee ballots, denying their request that local election clerks accept absentee ballots that contain partial addresses of witnesses.

Dane County Circuit Judge Juan Colas said in his ruling (pdf) that in the past 56 years that Wisconsin elections have been conducted, and absentee ballots counted, they have apparently been done so “without a legally binding definition of the witness address.”

The judge noted that the nearly 60 years of precedent was enough to determine whether an absentee ballot has enough of a witness address to count.

“Since then, until the present, clerks have been legally free to interpret the term. They presumably have done so in good faith, in keeping with their oaths of office, and drawing on the non-binding guidance issued by the WEC and its predecessors, and perhaps also on advice from their jurisdictions’ attorneys,” Colas wrote.

“In short, the legal status quo with respect to the definition of ‘address’ is the same as it has been for 56 years. Local clerks apply their understanding of the term ‘address’ to absentee ballot certifications, relying on non-binding advice from state elections authorities and, at least in some cases, advice from their municipal attorneys,” Colas continued.

“Evidence that there is variation in how clerks interpret the term (even evidence of increased variation), does not change the status quo, which is that the law has always left room for local clerks to interpret and apply the term to the ballot envelope before them.”

According to guidance from the Wisconsin Elections Commission (WEC), an address is defined as three components: a street number, street name, and municipality.

‘Varying Interpretations’ of Address Requirement Being Applied

In a motion (pdf) filed in court on Oct. 25, Rise Inc, a group that works to get young people to vote, said that new evidence had come to light which showed that “clerks across Wisconsin are applying varying interpretations of the absentee ballot witness address requirement,” denying the idea that WEC’s three-component definition is the ‘status quo.’”

The group has asked that an address requires only enough information to determine the location of the witness.

Colas on Wednesday said it was inappropriate to issue an order that changes the status quo.

The ruling comes within days of the Nov. 8 midterm elections. Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers, a Democrat, and Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) are both up for reelection in the battleground state.

In a separate case this week, the 1st District Court of Appeals declined to hear an appeal of a ruling from Dane County Circuit Judge Nia Trammell in late October regarding the League of Women Voters of Wisconsin.

The League asked that the court declare that a missing address on a mail-in ballot means only that the address field is left entirely blank, and that election officials be allowed to count mail-in ballots with incomplete addresses on them.

Trammell rejected the request, arguing that it “would upend the status quo and not preserve it” and “frustrate the electoral process by causing confusion,” with just weeks to go until the elections.

  • Guest says:

    Democrats will cheat everywhere they can!!!

    • Fukliberals says:

      I have lived in Madison WI. for 7 years and i can’t wait to get the hell out of here moved here for my Wife .. This place is a Communist Paradise, They Hate GOD and everything is BLM/Trans/Gay everywhere. Vote in the Park over 200 Parks Drink a 40 Smoke some crack and have some wacko be a witness, Vote drop boxes everywhere, No address verification or Witness Verification either.. DemocRATS are the SCUM OF THE EARTH !! .. “FJB ” .

  • Hello, to that Wisconsin Federal Judge, Sir or Ma’am, all Votes Need Thelat Voter’s Home Address ( NOT THEIR WORK ADDRESS), Their Social Security number, and Name of The Voter, Is This Correct! Which means said Voter can NOT Vote In Another State or Address, Is This, Correct!?! Because people that have homes in another states or cities CAN NOT VOTE MORE THAN JUST ONCE, Is This Correct!?!

  • Oh, here is 1 more question, Mr. or Mrs. or Ms. Federal Judge, Sir or Ma’am, Doesn’t every Election Worker Have To Double Check Every Ballot, To NOT Count Extra Ballots From The Very Same Person, That Has To Be Living Inside The USA!?! Which Means That Person Can NOT BE A ILLEGAL FOREIGN ALIENS NAME, Is This Correct!?! I Just Want To Be Crystal Clear About ONLY “We The Legal Citizens/People And Legal Immigrants Of The USA Can Never VOTE MORE THAN JUST ONCE IN EACH US ELECTION, Is This Correct!?!



    The mayor of a Florida community has resigned only months after he was elected, claiming there is more corruption than he can battle. Former...


    The Supreme Court on June 20 upheld a 2017 tax on “unrealized” income from overseas investments by a vote of 7–2. Unrealized income reflects...


    Dramatic footage has surfaced on X showing a Juneteenth celebration in Oakland, California, which was transformed into a warzone in the overnight hours. What...


    Disney used to be the magic kingdom, but now it’s a DEI empire that’s continued to virtue signal just how woke it is, both...