New York City's administration is facing significant upheaval as key officials resign amidst an ongoing federal corruption investigation.
According to Just The News, the city's chief legal counsel and the police commissioner have both stepped down, while several other high-ranking officials are under scrutiny by federal investigators.
The resignations come in the wake of FBI raids on the homes of Mayor Eric Adams' top aides, signaling a widening probe into potential corruption within the city's government. These developments have sent shockwaves through the administration and raised questions about the extent of the investigation.
Lisa Zornberg, who had served as New York City's chief counsel since July 2023, tendered her resignation on Saturday. Her decision to step down comes just one week after the FBI conducted raids on the residences of Mayor Adams' close associates. Zornberg, a former Manhattan federal prosecutor, had been in her role for just over a year before her abrupt exit.
In her statement, Zornberg expressed gratitude to Mayor Adams for the opportunity to serve the city and voiced her continued support for his work. Mayor Adams, in turn, thanked Zornberg for her service and indicated that a replacement would be announced soon.
The timing of Zornberg's resignation, so close to the FBI raids, has fueled speculation about the potential connection between her departure and the ongoing federal investigation.
Prior to Zornberg's resignation, New York Police Department Commissioner Edward Caban had also stepped down from his position. Caban's resignation came in the immediate aftermath of federal investigators raiding his home and the residences of other high-ranking NYPD officials as part of the corruption probe.
The investigation has cast a wide net, encompassing not only Caban but also his twin brother, James. According to reports, James Caban is under scrutiny for allegedly acting as a "fixer" for Manhattan restaurants and clubs under the guise of providing consulting services.
The scope of the federal investigation appears to be extensive, with raids also targeting the homes of Deputy Mayor for Public Safety Phil Banks and the shared residence of Schools Chancellor David Banks and First Deputy Mayor Sheena Wright.
While no charges have been filed as of yet, the federal corruption probe seems to be intensifying and expanding its focus. The investigation appears to be centered on Mayor Adams' inner circle and his allies, suggesting a comprehensive examination of potential misconduct within the city's administration.
The raids on multiple high-ranking officials' homes indicate that federal investigators are gathering evidence and information from various sources within the city government. This broad approach suggests that the probe may be looking into systemic issues rather than isolated incidents.
The fact that the investigation has reached such senior levels of the administration, including the deputy mayor and schools chancellor, underscores the seriousness and potential far-reaching implications of the probe.
New York City's government is grappling with a major crisis as key officials resign amid a federal corruption investigation. The departures of Chief Legal Counsel Lisa Zornberg and NYPD Commissioner Edward Caban have left significant gaps in the city's leadership. FBI raids on the homes of Mayor Adams' top aides and other high-ranking officials suggest a wide-ranging probe into potential misconduct. While no charges have been filed, the investigation's scope and the resignations it has prompted indicate serious concerns about corruption within the city's administration.
Former President Donald Trump is facing fresh accusations of violating a gag order in his Manhattan hush money case, sparking renewed legal scrutiny.
This development comes just a day after Trump's attempt to lift the gag order was rejected by the New York Court of Appeals, raising concerns over whether his recent remarks were intended to disrupt legal proceedings, as Alternet reports.
The gag order, which was imposed by New York State Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan, is designed to limit Trump’s public statements about the ongoing case. On Thursday, the New York Court of Appeals declined to remove the restrictions, leaving them in place as the former president continues to face charges in a criminal case linked to hush money payments during his 2016 campaign.
Despite the court’s decision, Trump held a press conference on Friday, during which he made specific allegations that caught the attention of legal observers. According to legal expert Lisa Rubin, Trump’s comments may have crossed a line. Rubin stated that Trump "arguably violated" the gag order by focusing his speech on a particular individual who he alleged played a central role in orchestrating his legal troubles.
Trump’s remarks centered on an unnamed person, whom he claimed had been sent by the White House to New York in order to start New York Attorney General Letitia James’s civil fraud case against him. Trump further suggested that this individual later shifted to work with the Manhattan District Attorney's Office to support the criminal case now under Justice Merchan’s jurisdiction.
Rubin, who closely follows the case, suggested that Trump’s timing and the content of these claims were inaccurate. She noted that while it was clear Trump had a specific person in mind, "both the timing and context" of their return to New York did not match Trump’s narrative.
The concern over whether Trump violated the gag order is not just about the content of his statements but also his intent in making them. Rubin highlighted the key legal standard governing gag orders, which revolves around whether Trump’s comments were made with the purpose of interfering with the lawyer’s ongoing work on the case or if he acted with the knowledge that such interference was likely to happen.
This focus on intent is particularly important, as Trump’s accusations, if seen as an attempt to hinder the lawyer’s efforts, could escalate the legal challenges facing the former president. Rubin described the situation as a "close call" and said it would be up to the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office to determine whether Trump’s remarks crossed the line.
Rubin concluded that while the violation was not clear-cut, it still warranted serious consideration. "From where I sit," she said, "it's at least a close call and something for the Manhattan DA's office to think through."
The gag order remains a critical component of Trump's ongoing legal battles. It was put in place to limit the possibility of Trump influencing the case through public statements that could sway public opinion or disrupt the legal process. Friday’s press conference may have pushed those boundaries once again, potentially placing Trump in a precarious legal position.
The Manhattan District Attorney's Office has yet to publicly respond to the latest incident. However, the situation is likely to be closely monitored as legal experts debate whether Trump’s remarks meet the threshold for a violation of the court-imposed order.
Trump has consistently denied any wrongdoing in both the hush money case and the civil fraud case brought by Attorney General Letitia James. He has long characterized the legal actions against him as politically motivated, often speaking out publicly despite legal restrictions.
As the legal proceedings continue, it remains to be seen whether this latest incident will result in further action by the court. Trump’s legal team has not yet issued a public statement regarding the potential violation of the gag order.
The Ohio Secretary of State's office has issued a warning to election boards after a troubling discovery.
Following an investigation into the submission of illegal voter registration forms, Secretary of State Frank LaRose called on all 88 Ohio county boards of elections to exercise increased vigilance as the state nears the 2024 voter registration deadline, as a press release from his office explains.
LaRose’s Election Integrity Unit uncovered the illegal forms after one was submitted in Haitian Creole. The Clark County Board of Elections identified the unauthorized document and traced its origins to a county government assistance office.
The form was mistakenly included among materials outsourced to a foreign language translation service. Director of Investigations Hun Yi confirmed this and praised the Clark County Board for promptly rejecting the form and collaborating to trace its origin.
LaRose emphasized the gravity of the situation. He expressed concerns over the form's submission, given the significant population of Haitian refugees in Springfield. His office remains vigilant against fraudulent voter registration activities.
The secretary also warned about the involvement of third-party groups in these illegal practices. Black Fork Strategies, among others, is under scrutiny for submitting fraudulent voter registrations in multiple Ohio counties.
LaRose reiterated the importance of vigilance as the state approaches the 2024 election. His office has been aggressively pursuing groups and individuals responsible for fraudulent registrations. County boards were advised to pay close attention to any submissions, particularly those from third-party organizations.
Director Yi echoed this sentiment, reminding all officials to scrutinize any forms submitted by public or private entities. He urged local boards to be especially cautious of third-party groups hiring paid canvassers who might prioritize quantity over accuracy.
The investigation also revealed ongoing efforts to audit the statewide voter rolls for compliance with Ohio's citizenship voting requirement. The Secretary's office has employed federal and state databases to identify any potential non-citizen registrations.
LaRose pointed to the need for a statewide effort to ensure election integrity. His office continues to enforce strict rules against the use of unauthorized registration forms, a requirement mandated by law.
He also warned that fraudulent activities could become more frequent as the election draws nearer, especially from third-party groups or paid operatives working under bounty systems. “We’re cracking down on illegal forms that aren’t authorized,” LaRose stated. “We’re reminding elections officials to remain vigilant and protect the integrity of the election process.”
Ohio’s Election Integrity Unit has been monitoring the situation closely, continuing investigations into the fraudulent practices of Black Fork Strategies and other involved groups. The secretary has made clear that any evidence of groups encouraging non-citizens to participate in elections will be investigated thoroughly.
As the state moves closer to the 2024 election, Ohio voters can expect increased scrutiny of registration forms and enhanced measures to protect the integrity of the voter rolls.
John Cassaday, the renowned comic book artist known for his iconic work on series such as Planetary, Astonishing X-Men, and Star Wars, has died at the age of 52.
The news was first reported by Screen Rant, citing a Facebook post from Cassaday's sister, Robin Cassaday, who confirmed his passing.
Cassaday's untimely death has sent shockwaves through the comic book industry, with fellow creators and fans alike mourning the loss of a true visionary. His distinctive art style and storytelling prowess earned him multiple Eisner Awards, the comic industry's highest honor, and left an indelible mark on the medium.
Throughout his career, Cassaday worked with major publishers, including Marvel, DC, Image, and Dark Horse, contributing to some of the most beloved series in comic book history. His collaboration with writer Joss Whedon on Astonishing X-Men is particularly acclaimed, revitalizing the franchise and earning critical acclaim.
Cassaday's impact extended beyond the X-Men universe. His work on Star Wars #1, a collaboration with writer Jason Aaron, became the best-selling single-issue comic in twenty years when it was released in 2015. This achievement underscores Cassaday's ability to captivate readers and bring iconic characters to life on the page.
In addition to his work in comics, Cassaday also ventured into film and television. He directed episodes of the sci-fi series Dollhouse and was involved in the production of the 2012 horror film House on the Hill, showcasing his versatility as a creative professional.
The news of Cassaday's passing prompted an outpouring of tributes from fellow comic book creators, many of whom cited him as a major influence on their own careers. Scott Snyder, known for his work on Batman, expressed the profound impact Cassaday had on the industry:
The impact of John Cassaday's work on myself and the whole industry is indelible. This is a tremendous loss to the comics community,
Mark Waid, an early collaborator of Cassaday's, offered a heartfelt tribute that encapsulated the artist's significance:
John Cassaday, I will say without hesitation and with very little fear of disagreement, was one of the very best illustrators and storytellers to ever work in the comics medium. Like Neal Adams, Jim Steranko, or Michael Golden, he is a touchstone, a reference point to the dozens and dozens of artists whose work was influenced by his. Most people are lucky if more than a dozen people are still talking about them a month after they pass. My friend John will be talked about and remembered by an entire industry for ages.
Other notable creators, including Declan Shalvey, Bruno Redondo, and Tom King, credited Cassaday with influencing their artistic styles and rekindling their passion for comics.
The Sandman artist Colleen Doran referred to Cassaday as her "sweet buddy," while Charles Soule, known for his work on Darth Vader, called him "a once-in-ever talent."
Cassaday's contributions to the comic book medium extend far beyond his published works. His unique artistic vision and storytelling techniques have inspired countless artists and writers, shaping the industry for years to come. His ability to create instantly recognizable and emotionally resonant imagery set a new standard for comic book art.
Throughout his career, Cassaday received numerous accolades, including multiple Eisner Awards for Best Penciler/Inker, the Eagle Award for Favorite Comics Artist: Pencils, and the Wizard World Fan Award for Favorite Penciler. These honors reflect the high regard in which he was held by both fans and his peers in the industry.
The comic book world has lost a true legend in John Cassaday. His passing at the age of 52 cuts short a career that had already left an indelible mark on the medium. Cassaday's work on Planetary, Astonishing X-Men, and Star Wars will continue to inspire and delight readers for generations to come. His unique artistic vision, storytelling prowess, and ability to capture the essence of iconic characters ensure that his legacy will endure in the annals of comic book history.
Ohio Governor Mike DeWine has announced a significant allocation of resources to address the surge of Haitian migrants in Springfield.
According to AP News, the state will provide $2.5 million in healthcare funding and deploy state troopers to manage the situation in the city of approximately 59,000 residents.
Since 2020, Springfield has received an estimated 15,000 Haitian migrants through the federal Temporary Protected Status program. This influx has placed considerable strain on local resources, prompting the governor's decision to intervene with state support.
The $2.5 million in healthcare funding will be distributed over two years to bolster primary healthcare services through the county health department and private healthcare institutions. This move aims to alleviate the pressure on local medical facilities, which have been struggling to meet the increased demand.
In addition to healthcare support, Governor DeWine has ordered the deployment of Ohio State Highway Patrol troopers to Springfield. These officers will assist local law enforcement in addressing traffic issues that have arisen due to the increase in new residents unfamiliar with U.S. traffic laws.
The governor emphasized the wide-ranging impact of the migrant surge on the community. He stated:
These dramatic surges impact every citizen of the community, every citizen. Moms who have to wait hours in a waiting room with a sick child, everyone who drives on the streets, and it affects children who go to school in more crowded classrooms.
While Governor DeWine does not oppose the Temporary Protected Status program itself, he has called for increased federal support for affected communities.
The program, which allows Haitians to seek refuge in the United States due to ongoing unrest and violence in their home country, has led to similar influxes in other Ohio cities, including Findlay and Lima.
The situation has also drawn attention from other state officials. Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost has directed his office to explore legal options, including the possibility of a lawsuit, to prevent the federal government from sending what he termed "an unlimited number of migrants" to Ohio communities.
Governor DeWine, whose family operates a charity in Haiti, expressed empathy for the migrants' situation. He described the Haitian arrivals as generally hard-working individuals seeking to escape violence and find better opportunities in Ohio.
However, the governor also acknowledged the challenges faced by local communities in accommodating such a rapid population increase. The state's intervention aims to strike a balance between providing humanitarian support and addressing the practical concerns of Springfield residents.
The allocation of state resources to Springfield highlights the complex interplay between federal immigration policies and their local impacts. As cities across Ohio grapple with similar challenges, the state government's response in Springfield may serve as a model for addressing the needs of both new arrivals and long-time residents.
Governor DeWine's decision to provide $2.5 million in healthcare funding and deploy state troopers to Springfield addresses the immediate challenges posed by the Haitian migrant influx. This action underscores the strain placed on local resources by the sudden population increase.
While acknowledging the humanitarian aspects of the situation, the state government is taking steps to mitigate the impact on community services and infrastructure. The ongoing situation in Springfield reflects the broader national debate on immigration policy and its effects on local communities.
The Cleveland Browns may have found a potential avenue to void quarterback Deshaun Watson's contract guarantees following a new lawsuit filed against him.
According to a report by Browns Wire, a key provision in Watson's contract could allow the team to terminate the remainder of his deal without penalty.
The latest legal action against Watson has brought renewed attention to the terms of his contract with the Browns.
Mike Florio of Pro Football Talk reportedly obtained a copy of the agreement, revealing a clause that may prove crucial in determining the quarterback's future with the team.
The provision in question requires Watson to disclose certain information to the club, including any criminal charges, indictments, or convictions.
It also covers conduct that could potentially lead to such charges. The critical factor now is whether Watson and his representatives disclosed this particular instance to the Browns when he signed his contract.
If it is determined that Watson failed to disclose relevant information as required by the contract, the Browns could potentially have grounds to void the remaining guarantees. This would effectively allow the team to terminate the contract without incurring financial penalties.
The specific language in the contract, as reported by Browns Wire, states:
Player hereby represents and warrants (except as otherwise disclosed to club in writing), as of the date hereof, that (1) Player has not been charged with, indicted for, convicted of or pled nolo contendre to any felony and/or misdemeanor involving fraud or moral turpitude, (ii) Player has not engaged in conduct which could subject him to a charge, indictment or conviction of any such offense, and (iii) no circumstances exist that would prevent Player's continuing availability to the Club for duration of this Contract.
The discovery of this contract provision comes at a time when the Browns are facing renewed scrutiny over their decision to acquire Watson. The quarterback's tenure with the team has been marred by controversy since his arrival, and this latest development adds another layer of complexity to the situation.
For the Browns, the possibility of voiding Watson's contract could provide an unexpected way out of a challenging situation. However, it remains to be seen whether the team will pursue this option or how it might impact their long-term plans at the quarterback position.
Watson, on the other hand, now faces additional uncertainty about his future in Cleveland. The outcome of this situation could have significant implications for his career and financial prospects in the NFL.
The Cleveland Browns may have grounds to void Deshaun Watson's contract guarantees due to a newly filed lawsuit against the quarterback. A key provision in Watson's contract requires him to disclose certain information, including potential legal issues.
If Watson failed to disclose this particular instance when signing his contract, the Browns could potentially terminate the deal without penalty. This development adds another layer of complexity to Watson's tumultuous tenure with the team and raises questions about his future in Cleveland.
Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan has proposed a method to enforce the recently implemented ethics code for the nation's highest court.
Speaking at the New York University School of Law, Kagan suggested creating a panel of lower court judges to evaluate ethics violation claims against Supreme Court justices, according to NBC News.
The Supreme Court issued a new ethics code last year in response to pressure over alleged ethics violations, primarily involving conservative Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito. However, the code was immediately criticized for lacking an enforcement mechanism. Kagan's proposal aims to address this concern by establishing a panel appointed by Chief Justice John Roberts to handle allegations against the justices.
Kagan emphasized that the proposed panel of lower court judges could effectively manage ethics violation claims against Supreme Court justices. She believes this approach would help ensure compliance with the code of conduct and boost public confidence in the court's ethical standards.
The liberal justice argued that the panel could quickly dismiss baseless allegations while thoroughly examining those with merit. Kagan stated:
It seems like a good idea in terms of ensuring that we comply with our own code of conduct going forward in the future. It seems like a good idea in terms of ensuring that people have confidence that we're doing exactly that.
Addressing concerns that the panel might lead to an increase in unfounded accusations, Kagan pointed out that many allegations against justices already go unresolved. She believes the panel could effectively "sort the wheat from the chaff" by swiftly dismissing frivolous claims.
Critics of Kagan's proposal have raised concerns about the potential for a flood of baseless claims and the possibility that lower court judges might be too deferential to Supreme Court justices. However, Kagan dismissed these worries in her remarks at NYU.
Regarding the fear of increased unfounded charges, Kagan noted that such accusations are already prevalent. She expressed confidence that the panel could efficiently handle and dismiss frivolous allegations without exacerbating the issue.
As for concerns about lower court judges being too deferential, Kagan asserted that these judges "are not so afraid of us" as some might assume. She expressed confidence in the ability of judges across the country to approach this task fairly and seriously.
While Kagan's proposal has garnered attention, it remains unclear whether her Supreme Court colleagues support the idea. Kagan emphasized that she was speaking only for herself and not referring to any potential congressional action on the matter.
Another liberal justice, Ketanji Brown Jackson, recently expressed openness to an enforceable ethics code but stopped short of endorsing a specific plan. The ultimate fate of Kagan's proposal will likely depend on the support it receives from other justices and potential legislative action.
Justice Elena Kagan has proposed creating a panel of lower court judges to enforce the Supreme Court's new ethics code. This panel, appointed by Chief Justice John Roberts, would evaluate ethics violation claims against Supreme Court justices, dismissing baseless allegations while thoroughly examining credible ones.
Kagan believes this approach would ensure compliance with ethical standards and boost public confidence in the court. While the proposal has garnered attention, its future depends on support from other justices and potential legislative action.
Former President Donald Trump has unveiled a comprehensive plan to address election integrity if he returns to the White House.
According to Just the News, Trump's proposal includes expanding the 25th Amendment to hold vice presidents accountable for concealing a president's incapacity and implementing severe penalties for election fraud.
During a speech in Mosinee, Wisconsin, Trump outlined his vision for combating election cheating and ensuring transparency at the highest levels of government. The former president's plan comes amid ongoing debates about election security and concerns over the mental acuity of elected officials.
Trump proposed modifying the 25th Amendment to allow for the removal of a vice president who engages in covering up a president's incapacity. This suggestion appears to be a veiled reference to the current administration, with Trump subtly connecting Joe Biden's perceived mental decline to potential concealment by Vice President Kamala Harris.
The former president stated his support for altering the amendment to permit the ouster of a vice president who "lies or engages in a conspiracy to cover up the incapacity of the president of the United States." Trump emphasized the severity of such actions, declaring that they would be grounds for immediate impeachment and removal from office.
This proposed expansion of the 25th Amendment reflects Trump's broader concerns about transparency and accountability in the executive branch. It also highlights the ongoing political discourse surrounding the mental fitness of elected officials and the responsibilities of those in supporting roles.
Trump took to his social media platform, TruthSocial, to further elaborate on his plans for election integrity. He vowed to closely monitor the 2024 Presidential Election and promised swift action against those found guilty of election fraud.
Trump stated:
WHEN I WIN, those people that CHEATED will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the Law, which will include long term prison sentences so that this Depravity of Justice does not happen again. We cannot let our Country further devolve into a Third World Nation, AND WE WON'T.
The former president's statement underscores his commitment to maintaining the integrity of the electoral process and deterring potential bad actors. Trump's proposed crackdown would extend to various individuals involved in the election process, including lawyers, political operatives, donors, illegal voters, and corrupt election officials.
Trump's plan for addressing election fraud involves implementing severe legal consequences for those found guilty of misconduct. The former president emphasized that his administration would pursue prosecution at levels "unfortunately, never seen before in our Country."
This aggressive stance on election fraud reflects Trump's ongoing concerns about the integrity of the electoral process. By proposing such stringent measures, Trump aims to deter potential wrongdoing and restore public confidence in the democratic system.
The former president's statement highlights the seriousness with which he views election integrity:
Those involved in unscrupulous behavior will be sought out, caught, and prosecuted at levels, unfortunately, never seen before in our Country.
Trump's proposed crackdown on election fraud and his call for expanding the 25th Amendment represent significant policy positions in his potential future administration. These measures reflect ongoing debates about election security, governmental transparency, and the mental fitness of elected officials. As the 2024 election approaches, Trump's stance on these issues will likely continue to shape political discourse and influence voter perceptions of electoral integrity and governmental accountability.
In a significant legal development, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has been removed from the presidential ballots in both North Carolina and Michigan, following appeals court decisions in both states.
These rulings have prompted delays in absentee ballot distribution as state officials scramble to adjust their election processes to fit the final slate of candidates, as NBC News reports.
In North Carolina, an appeals court on Friday reversed a previous lower court ruling and ordered Kennedy’s name to be removed from the ballot. The ruling came just a day after the lower court had denied the request, setting off a chain of actions among election officials to halt the mailing of ballots to voters.
The North Carolina State Board of Elections quickly responded to the ruling, emailing county election officials to stop the mailing of ballots. According to Paul Cox, general counsel for the state election authority, officials are now reviewing the order to determine the next steps. "Obviously, this will be a major undertaking for everyone," Cox said.
As a result of the court decision, North Carolina counties are required to reprint ballots, an action that is expected to significantly delay the mailing process. This could especially affect military personnel and overseas voters who rely on receiving their ballots in a timely manner to cast their votes.
In Michigan, a similar scenario is unfolding. An appeals court ruled to remove Kennedy from the state’s ballot, a decision that clashes with the stance taken by Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson. Benson had supported keeping Kennedy on the ballot, but now faces an uphill battle in appealing the ruling.
Angela Benander, spokesperson for Benson, announced that an appeal will be filed immediately. With military and overseas ballots needing to be mailed by Sept. 21, Michigan is working under tight deadlines. Absentee ballots for the general public are scheduled for release on Sept. 26, further compounding the urgency of the situation.
Benander emphasized the critical nature of adhering to these deadlines to ensure that all eligible voters, especially those serving abroad, have the opportunity to participate in the 2024 election. “Benson plans to appeal immediately, as military and overseas ballots must go out soon,” Benander said in a statement.
Kennedy’s removal from the ballot comes after the presidential candidate withdrew from the race and endorsed former President Donald Trump. Initially running as a third-party candidate, Kennedy’s presence on the ballot had been seen as potentially weakening support for the Republican nominee.
The legal battles over ballot access are not expected to end with these decisions. In both North Carolina and Michigan, election authorities are reviewing their options, and additional appeals could arise in the coming days. Officials in both states are grappling with how to move forward while balancing legal requirements and voter access.
For voters, particularly those who are serving overseas, these delays could present obstacles to receiving and returning ballots in time. The pressure is now on state officials to rectify the situation quickly, ensuring minimal disruption to the election process.
While the cost of reprinting ballots is one major concern, the implications for the broader election timeline are just as pressing. States must balance the need to follow court rulings with the need to ensure a fair and accessible election process for all citizens, including those abroad.
As the November 2024 election approaches, these ballot issues add another layer of complexity to what is already shaping up to be a contentious election season. With appeals likely, the situation in North Carolina and Michigan will continue to develop in the coming weeks.
The debate over ballot drop boxes is heating up as several states and municipalities grapple with decisions on whether to allow their use in the upcoming November election.
As the early voting period approaches in numerous jurisdictions, concerns about election security and the management of drop boxes have ignited debate across the country, as Just the News reports.
Ballot drop boxes, which became more common during the 2020 presidential election, are now at the center of legal and political discussions. Some states and municipalities are considering new restrictions, while others are opting to ban them altogether as they weigh concerns about security, legality, and practical implementation.
In Ohio, Secretary of State Frank LaRose recently issued a directive requiring that voters return their own absentee ballots via drop boxes. This directive came after a federal court partially struck down a state law on absentee voting for disabled individuals, a decision spurred by a lawsuit from the League of Women Voters of Ohio. The lawsuit aimed to protect the voting rights of those who need assistance.
LaRose's directive also mandates that assistants delivering ballots for others sign a legal attestation. In a letter to Republican leaders in the state legislature, he urged them to consider removing ballot drop boxes altogether, citing security concerns. However, the directive has drawn sharp criticism from Democrats and voting rights groups. Jen Miller, executive director of the League of Women Voters of Ohio, expressed concern, arguing that the directive places an unnecessary burden on voters.
Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine, however, has dismissed the idea of banning ballot drop boxes. DeWine emphasized that Ohio's election system is already robust and secure. He argued that any proposed changes to the state's voting procedures would need substantial evidence to justify them.
Meanwhile, Ohio remains one of the key battlegrounds where election officials are facing pressure from both sides of the political aisle. The focus is on how the use of drop boxes might impact the election's accessibility and security.
In Wisconsin, the legal landscape surrounding drop boxes took another turn when the state Supreme Court ruled in July to permit their use. This decision overturned a prior 2022 ruling that had banned drop boxes, much to the relief of voting rights advocates.
Despite the court ruling, two municipalities in Waukesha County -- Brookfield and New Berlin -- voted to ban drop boxes locally. Brookfield officials pointed to extended absentee voting hours and options for drive-up voting for disabled voters as reasons for their decision, asserting that the drop boxes were no longer necessary. In New Berlin, officials cited logistical and resource concerns, arguing that managing ballot drop boxes created more hassle than it was worth. As a result, both towns will go forward without drop boxes for the November election, leaving voters to use alternative absentee voting methods.
The debate is also playing out in Pennsylvania, where several counties have chosen not to use drop boxes in the upcoming election. Westmoreland County made this decision as early as March, pointing to the high costs associated with operating and transporting ballots from the boxes.
Other counties, including Beaver, Butler, and Fayette, have also opted out, citing similar concerns. This decision has sparked conversations among Pennsylvania voters about the impact it will have on absentee and early voting participation in those areas. The absence of drop boxes could place greater pressure on other voting systems, as county officials aim to maintain election security while managing the costs of the process.
In Wyoming, Secretary of State Chuck Gray has taken a firm stance against drop boxes. In June, Gray rescinded a previous directive that allowed for their use, stating that they are neither safe nor secure according to the Wyoming Election Code. He has also argued that drop boxes do not have a statutory basis for absentee voting.
Gray’s decision was met with opposition from the County Clerks’ Association of Wyoming. The association’s president, Malcolm Ervin, countered that the election code permits the use of drop boxes at the discretion of individual county clerks. He also expressed frustration with the lack of legislative clarity on the matter. Gray remains resolute in his belief that drop boxes should not be part of Wyoming’s future elections, citing the need for security and trust in the process.