GET THE APP
Thursday, April 2, 2026

Category: Election Integrity
January 28, 2026
Election Integrity
News

BREAKING: FBI Raids Fulton County Elections Office.

PULSE POINTS

❓WHAT HAPPENED: Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) agents executed a search warrant at the Fulton County elections office.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: FBI agents, under the leadership of Director Kash Patel.

📍WHEN & WHERE: Wednesday, at the county’s main election office in Union City, near Atlanta.

💬KEY QUOTE: The FBI spokesman stated agents were “executing a court authorized law enforcement action.”

🎯IMPACT: The search is part of efforts to address political grievances related to the 2020 election.

IN FULL

The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) executed a search warrant at the Fulton County elections office, located near Atlanta, Georgia, on Wednesday. The action was confirmed by an agency spokesman, who indicated that the agents were performing a “court authorized law enforcement action” at the main election office of the county in Union City, just south of Atlanta.

This search is part of the FBI’s efforts under Director Kash Patel to address issues with election integrity, a key priority of President J. Donald Trump. These efforts include collaborating with the Justice Department to investigate several officials and institutions with a lax attitude towards the security of America’s elections, particularly in 2020.

Speaking at the World Economic Forum (WEF) summit in Davos, Switzerland, last week, President Trump warned that “People will soon be prosecuted for what they did,” describing his statement as “breaking news.”

The Justice Department had not released any comments regarding the search as of the time of publication.

This story is developing…

Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.

show less
show more
January 23, 2026
Election Integrity
News

Luna Vows to Shut Down House If Senate GOP Keeps Stalling Election Integrity Bill.

PULSE POINTS

❓WHAT HAPPENED: Representative Anna Paulina Luna is pushing for the passage of the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act, threatening to shut down the House floor if the Senate does not take action.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Rep. Anna Paulina Luna, Senate Republicans, Senate Democrats, and other House and Senate members.

📍WHEN & WHERE: The House passed the SAVE Act in April 2025; Luna issued her statement on January 23, 2026, via X (formerly Twitter).

💬KEY QUOTE: “If the Senate does not pass the SAVE Act and/or schedule a date for a vote by the time we return, I have enough votes from other members to shut down the floor of the House.” – Rep. Anna Paulina Luna

🎯IMPACT: The SAVE Act faces significant opposition from Democrats and uncertainty among Senate Republicans, making its passage uncertain.

IN FULL

Representative Anna Paulina Luna (R-FL) is ramping up pressure on the Senate GOP to act on the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act, warning she is prepared to disrupt House business if the Senate continues to stall the bill. The legislation, which would require proof of citizenship to vote in federal elections, passed the House in April 2025, but it has yet to advance in the Senate.

Luna, a close ally of President Donald J. Trump, said she is prepared to shut down activity on the House floor if the Senate does not pass the bill or at least schedule a vote by the time lawmakers return in February. “If the Senate does not pass the SAVE Act and/or schedule a date for a vote by the time we return, I have enough votes from other members to shut down the floor of the House,” Luna wrote on X. She added, “We are not going to play games—especially given that half of the Republicans in both the House and Senate are concerned about their reelection and want the floor open for their messaging bills.”

The SAVE Act, which President Donald J. Trump has publicly endorsed, is intended to bolster election integrity by requiring proof of U.S. citizenship and directing states to remove noncitizens from voter rolls. Republicans have largely supported the bill, while Democrats have criticized it as a “voter suppression” measure. Four House Democrats voted in favor of the legislation when it cleared the chamber.

The bill faces long odds in the Senate, where it would need 60 votes to overcome a filibuster. At present, it has 35 Republican cosponsors, including three members of Senate Republican leadership. However, several influential Senate Republicans, including Senate Majority Leader John Thune, have not signed on.

Luna, who represents Florida’s 13th District, has drawn national attention beyond election policy. As head of the House Oversight Committee’s Task Force on the Declassification of Federal Secrets, she has publicly suggested possible intelligence connections involving deceased pedophile Jeffrey Epstein, stating that “In my opinion, there is definitely an intelligence connection.”

She has also intervened in international politics, including publicly supporting German anti-mass migration activist Naomi Seibt’s bid for asylum in the United States, citing Antifa threats and government censorship in Germany.

Image by Gage Skidmore.

Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses

show less
show more
January 14, 2026
William Upton
Election Integrity
SCOTUS

SCOTUS Allows Landmark Challenge to Late Mail-In Ballots to Continue.

PULSE POINTS

❓WHAT HAPPENED: The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday cleared the way for several legal challenges to an Illinois law requiring election officials to count mail-in ballots received well after Election Day to proceed.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: The U.S. Supreme Court, Chief Justice John Roberts, Congressman Michael Bost (R-IL), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, and the Illinois State Board of Elections.

📍WHEN & WHERE: The ruling was issued on Wednesday, January 14, 2026, with litigation in the lower court now ongoing.

💬KEY QUOTE: “Nothing about Article III requires this result. Candidates have a concrete and particularized interest in the rules that govern the counting of votes in their elections, regardless whether those rules harm their electoral prospects or increase the cost of their campaigns.” — Chief Justice John Roberts

🎯IMPACT: Bost v. Illinois State Board of Elections could prove to be a foundational case in election law, impacting whether states can effectively extend Election Day beyond its constitutionally mandated date.

IN FULL

The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday cleared the way for several legal challenges to an Illinois law requiring election officials to count mail-in ballots received well after Election Day to be counted in the final vote tally to proceed, reversing a lower court decision that found the plaintiffs—who are or were candidates for office—lacked standing. Congressman Michael Bost (R-IL), along with Presidential elector nominees Laura Pollastrini and Susan Sweeney, filed a lawsuit against the Illinois State Board of Elections challenging a state law that requires officials “…to count mail-in ballots postmarked or certified no later than election day and received within two weeks of election day.”

Both a U.S. District Court and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit ordered the lawsuit dismissed on the grounds that the plaintiffs lacked standing. However, Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts found the Article III standing determination by the lower courts to be unfounded.

“Nothing about Article III requires this result. Candidates have a concrete and particularized interest in the rules that govern the counting of votes in their elections, regardless whether those rules harm their electoral prospects or increase the cost of their campaigns,” Chief Justice Roberts wrote for the majority. He continued, “Their interest extends to the integrity of the election—and the democratic process by which they earn or lose the support of the people they seek to represent.”

“As a candidate for office, Congressman Bost has standing to challenge the rules that govern the counting of votes in his election,” Roberts concluded, ordering: “The judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit is reversed, and the case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.”

Bost v. Illinois State Board of Elections could prove to be a foundational case in election law, impacting whether states can effectively extend Election Day beyond its constitutionally mandated date. While the Supreme Court did not offer any definitive ruling or indication on the constitutionality of counting mail-in ballots received after Election Day, litigation over the matter will be allowed to proceed—suggesting the high court anticipates taking up the matter on its merits in the future.

Image by Joe Ravi.

Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.

show less
show more
January 12, 2026
Election Integrity

Texas Is Sending Voter Data to the DOJ for Auditing.

PULSE POINTS

❓WHAT HAPPENED: Texas Governor Greg Abbott (R) announced the state sent its voter rolls to the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) to check for potential ineligible registrations.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Gov. Greg Abbott, Texas Secretary of State Jane Nelson, and the DOJ.

📍WHEN & WHERE: Announcement made on Monday; with eligibility reviews to occur across all 254 counties in Texas.

💬KEY QUOTE: “We want our voter rolls to be checked for potential ineligible registrations. Only US citizens can vote in Texas.” – Gov. Abbott

🎯IMPACT: Over 2,700 possible illegal immigrants were flagged as registered voters, prompting a statewide eligibility review.

IN FULL

Texas Governor Greg Abbott (R) confirmed on Monday that the state had sent its voter rolls to the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) to ensure that only eligible voters are registered. Abbott shared the news on X (formerly Twitter), emphasizing that only American citizens are allowed to vote in Texas—and in American federal elections on the whole.

“We want our voter rolls to be checked for potential ineligible registrations. Only U.S. citizens can vote in Texas,” Abbott stated. The move follows an October announcement by Texas Secretary of State Jane Nelson, who revealed that a cross-check of voter records had identified over 2,700 possible illegal immigrants registered to vote, leading to a review across all 254 counties in the state.

The Trump administration has increasingly pushed states to ensure voter roll compliance, asserting that maintaining accurate records is critical for public trust in election outcomes. However, Democrat-controlled states have largely attempted to resist the effort, claiming spuriously that sharing voter registration data with the DOJ could lead to privacy issues and the risk of eligible voters being improperly purged from the rolls.

Earlier this month, Democratic National Committee (DNC) Chair Ken Martin revealed that legal action could be taken against states that comply with the DOJ’s requests. Meanwhile, Texas is among at least seven states that have provided voter information to federal authorities. Meanwhile, late last year, the DOJ launched litigation against six Democrat-led states, including Delaware, Maryland, and Washington, for refusing to share their voter registration rolls, accusing them of violating federal election law.

Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.

show less
show more
January 12, 2026
Election Integrity
Lawfare

Biden Judge Blocks Trump’s Order Barring Late Mail-In Ballots.

PULSE POINTS

❓WHAT HAPPENED: A federal judge blocked parts of President Donald J. Trump’s election reform executive order, including a provision setting Election Day as the deadline for mail-in votes.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: President Donald Trump, U.S. District Court Judge John H. Chun, Washington and Oregon state officials, and White House Deputy Press Secretary Abigail Jackson.

📍WHEN & WHERE: The ruling was issued on Friday in Washington State by Judge Chun, a Biden appointee.

💬KEY QUOTE: “The Constitution assigns the states all authority to regulate the time, place, and manner of elections,” wrote Judge Chun in his ruling.

🎯IMPACT: The ruling limits the President’s power to impose changes on state election processes and is expected to be appealed by the Trump administration.

IN FULL

A federal judge in Washington State has issued an order blocking, in part, President Donald J. Trump‘s Executive Order enacting election integrity reforms. Late Friday, U.S. District Court Judge John H. Chun—a Joe Biden appointee—ruled that President Trump could not mandate Election Day as the deadline for receiving mail-in ballots, a key provision of the executive order issued in March.

The ruling comes after Washington and Oregon filed a lawsuit in April, arguing that the executive order violated the U.S. Constitution. Judge Chun stated in his 75-page decision that President Trump lacks the constitutional authority to impose such changes on state election processes. “The Constitution assigns the states all authority to regulate the time, place, and manner of elections,” Chun wrote, adding that the President’s authority to establish a national ballot-receipt deadline does not exist under the Constitution.

Trump’s March Executive Order also sought to withhold funding from states that do not require documentary proof of U.S. citizenship when registering to vote. This provision was similarly blocked by the court. Washington Attorney General Nick Brown (D) called the ruling “a huge victory for voters in Washington and Oregon, and for the rule of law.”

President Trump has consistently criticized mail-in ballots as vulnerable to fraud. On Truth Social, Trump previously announced plans to end the use of mail-in ballots and voting machines, stating, “I am going to lead a movement to get rid of MAIL-IN BALLOTS, and also, while we’re at it, Highly ‘Inaccurate,’ Very Expensive, and Seriously Controversial VOTING MACHINES.”

The White House has indicated that it will challenge the ruling, with Deputy Press Secretary Abigail Jackson stating, “President Trump cares deeply about the integrity of our elections and his executive order takes lawful actions to ensure election security. This is not the final say on the matter, and the administration expects ultimate victory on the issue.” In November, the U.S. Supreme Court took up a separate case on the legality of accepting mail-in ballots that arrive after Election Day, with oral arguments and a ruling expected sometime this year.

Image via League of Women Voters of California.

Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.

show less
show more
December 19, 2025
Election Integrity
News

Georgia’s Fulton County Admits to Counting 315,000 Uncertified Votes in 2020.

PULSE POINTS

❓WHAT HAPPENED: Fulton County admitted to counting approximately 315,000 early votes from the 2020 election without poll workers’ signatures.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: David Cross, a local election integrity activist, Ann Brumbaugh, attorney for the Fulton County Board of Registration and Elections, and 2020 candidates Donald Trump and Joe Biden.

📍WHEN & WHERE: December 2025, during a hearing before the Georgia State Election Board.

💬KEY QUOTE: “These are not clerical errors. They are catastrophic breaks in chain of custody and certification.” – David Cross

🎯IMPACT: The admission reinforces questions about election integrity in Fulton County and the legitimacy of the 2020 election.

IN FULL

Fulton County, Georgia, has admitted that roughly 315,000 early votes from the 2020 election were counted despite lacking required poll worker signatures on tabulation tapes, violating state law. The confirmation came at a December hearing of the Georgia State Election Board (SEB), related to a complaint brought by David Cross, an election integrity advocate in the area.

Cross submitted his complaint to the SEB back in March 2022, claiming Fulton County broke Georgia rules by tabulating votes without the mandated signatures on the tapes. Ann Brumbaugh, attorney for the Fulton County Board of Registration and Elections, acknowledged the missing signatures, saying the county does “not dispute that the tapes were not signed.”

An investigation by the Georgia Secretary of State’s Office verified that Fulton County did not follow proper procedures for signing the tabulation tapes. It also uncovered additional issues, including polling locations that did not verify their tapes.

In his presentation, Cross highlighted these problems, pointing to polling sites running at odd times and repeated scanner serial numbers. “These are not clerical errors. They are catastrophic breaks in chain of custody and certification,” he stressed.

Cross is calling on the SEB to sanction Fulton County and for the state to decertify the county’s 2020 early voting results. Notably, President Donald J. Trump “lost” Georgia to former President Joe Biden by only 11,779 votes.

Image by Gage Skidmore.

Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.

show less
show more
December 15, 2025
Election Integrity
Politics

DOJ Accuses Democratic Campaign Arm of Obstruction in California Redistricting Case.

PULSE POINTS

❓WHAT HAPPENED: The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) accused the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) of withholding key redistricting documents related to California’s Proposition 50.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: The DOJ, the DCCC, consultant Paul Mitchell, and California Governor Gavin Newsom (D).

📍WHEN & WHERE: The allegations surfaced ahead of a three-day federal court hearing beginning Monday in California.

💬KEY QUOTE: A source familiar with the DOJ’s thinking described the redistricting effort as a “brazen power grab” and accused the Newsom administration of “covering up the racially driven design” of the map.

🎯IMPACT: The DOJ claims the map prioritizes racial considerations, potentially violating constitutional protections, and has asked the court to block Proposition 50.

IN FULL

In a new federal court filing, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) contends the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC)—the House Democrats’ official campaign arm—worked to actively obstruct and interfere with the discovery process in a lawsuit concerning California’s Proposition 50. The DOJ alleges that the DCCC, along with consultant Paul Mitchell, withheld key documents and provided a massive data dump of files just days before a federal court hearing began—in an apparent attempt to prevent DOJ attorneys from having enough time to review the evidence.

According to the DOJ, Mitchell’s records included evidence that racial considerations were prioritized in the redistricting process. One slide deck reportedly promoted how the map would increase voting opportunities for Latino residents. The DOJ further stated that the DCCC misled the court by claiming it lacked control over Mitchell’s records, despite having a contractual right to access them.

The lawsuit, which the DOJ joined alongside the California Republican Party, alleges that Proposition 50 constitutes unconstitutional racial gerrymandering. The ballot measure, passed in November, allows for a new congressional map to be drawn in time for the 2026 midterms. The DOJ argues that the map was designed to favor Democrats and cancel out likely Republican gains from redistricting efforts in Texas.

A source familiar with the DOJ’s position criticized Governor Gavin Newsom‘s (D-CA) administration, telling media it appeared to be “covering up the racially driven design” of the map. The source described the plan as a “brazen power grab” that divides voters based on race and undermines the electoral process.

The DCCC has denied the allegations, claiming the DOJ is overstating its access to Mitchell’s files and attempting to “slam square pegs into round holes” to bolster its case. The DOJ has requested that the court find race to have been a significant factor in the drawing of the map, which would support the broader claim that Proposition 50 violates constitutional protections.

Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.

show less
show more
December 12, 2025
Election Integrity

Trump DOJ Sues Fulton County for 2020 Election Ballot Records.

PULSE POINTS

❓WHAT HAPPENED: The Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division filed a lawsuit against Fulton County, Georgia, seeking access to voting records from the 2020 presidential election.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: The Department of Justice (DOJ), Fulton County officials, and states including Colorado, Hawaii, Massachusetts, and Nevada.

📍WHEN & WHERE: The lawsuit was filed on Friday, December 12, 2025, targeting Fulton County, Georgia.

🎯IMPACT: The DOJ has now sued 18 states, along with Fulton County, over election-related records access.

IN FULL

The Department of Justice (DOJ) Civil Rights Division has filed a lawsuit against Fulton County, Georgia, demanding access to voting records from the 2020 presidential election. Filed on Friday, December 12, the legal action follows an October subpoena for ballots and other election materials, which Fulton County has not answered, according to the DOJ complaint.

Fulton County is notable as the location where President Donald J. Trump faced one of several Democrat lawfare efforts, in this instance initiated by disgraced District Attorney Fani Willis, who was eventually disqualified from prosecuting the case. In late November, Peter Skandalakis, director of the Prosecuting Attorney’s Council of Georgia, moved to dismiss the racketeering case against President Trump and his allies.

In addition to Fulton County, the department has filed lawsuits against Colorado, Hawaii, Massachusetts, and Nevada. These cases allege that the states failed to provide statewide voter registration lists upon request.

With these latest actions, the number of states sued by the DOJ over election-related issues has risen to 18, alongside the lawsuit against Fulton County.

Image by Steve Fernie.

Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.

show less
show more
December 12, 2025
Election Integrity
Lawfare

Trump Attempts to Pardon Colorado Election Clerk Tina Peters.

PULSE POINTS

❓WHAT HAPPENED: President Donald J. Trump announced a pardon for former Colorado county clerk Tina Peters, but her conviction is on state charges, which federal pardons do not cover.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Donald Trump, Tina Peters, Colorado Governor Jared Polis (D), Secretary of State Jena Griswold (D), and Attorney General Phil Weiser (D).

📍WHEN & WHERE: Trump made the announcement on Truth Social on Thursday evening; Peters is serving her sentence in Colorado.

💬KEY QUOTE: “Tina is sitting in a Colorado prison for the ‘crime’ of demanding Honest Elections. Today I am granting Tina a full Pardon for her attempts to expose Voter Fraud in the Rigged 2020 Presidential Election!” – Donald Trump

🎯IMPACT: The announcement has no legal effect on Peters’ state conviction.

IN FULL

President Donald J. Trump announced on Truth Social late Thursday that he was granting a pardon to Tina Peters, a 70-year-old former Colorado county clerk serving a nine-year prison sentence. Peters was convicted on state charges related to her involvement in accessing secure election data in 2020, a move she claimed was to expose voter fraud.

“Democrats have been relentless in their targeting of TINA PETERS, a Patriot who simply wanted to make sure that our Elections were Fair and Honest,” President Trump wrote, adding: “Tina is sitting in a Colorado prison for the ‘crime’ of demanding Honest Elections. Today I am granting Tina a full Pardon for her attempts to expose Voter Fraud in the Rigged 2020 Presidential Election!”

However, constitutional limits on presidential pardon powers mean his declaration of clemency has no legal effect on state convictions.

Colorado Governor Jared Polis (D), responding to the pardon announcement, noted the constitutional limits on presidential pardons. “Tina Peters was convicted by a jury of her peers, prosecuted by a Republican district attorney, and in a Republican county of Colorado, and found guilty of violating Colorado state laws, including criminal impersonation,” Polis stated. He continued, “No president has jurisdiction over state law nor the power to pardon a person for state convictions. This is a matter for the courts to decide, and we will abide by court orders.”

Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold (D) and Attorney General Phil Weiser (D) echoed the governor. “Tina Peters was convicted by a jury of her peers for state crimes in a state court. Trump has no constitutional authority to pardon her. His assault is not just on our democracy, but on states’ rights and the American constitution,” Griswold—who attempted to remove President Trump from the 2024 election ballot in Colorado—said in a statement.

Peters’ case has drawn national attention, with Trump previously directing federal authorities to intervene on her behalf. Despite her conviction, Peters has maintained her innocence and gained support from MAGA activists. In October of 2024, Peters received a nine-year prison sentence for allowing 2020 election skeptics to replicate Dominion voting machine hard drives to check for evidence of fraud. Peters was convicted in August 2024 on multiple charges, including official misconduct. The charges stemmed from her use of another person’s security badge to allow access to Mesa County election equipment by an individual connected to election skeptic Mike Lindell.

Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.

show less
show more
November 24, 2025
Election Integrity
Lawfare

Democrat Lawfare Orgs Are Challenging Justice Alito’s Order Restoring Texas Congressional Map.

PULSE POINTS

❓WHAT HAPPENED: Democrat Party-aligned electioneering groups have filed a challenge to Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito’s order allowing Texas to use its newly drawn congressional map, citing racial gerrymandering concerns.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Justice Samuel Alito, Texas state officials, and so-called voting rights groups opposing the map.

📍WHEN & WHERE: The emergency order was issued on Friday, November 21, 2025, with the challenge filed on Monday; the case is before the U.S. Supreme Court.

💬KEY QUOTE: Texas argued that altering district lines before the March primary would “disrupt election preparations and confuse voters.”

🎯IMPACT: The Supreme Court’s decision will determine whether Texas’s 2026 map remains in place while litigation continues.

IN FULL

Democrat Party-aligned electioneering groups are challenging Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito’s Friday order allowing Texas to use its newly drawn congressional map. In their filing, made on Monday, the far-left election lawfare organizations contend the state’s redistricting plan is an “extraordinary” case of racial gerrymandering.

The complaint argues the lower court was correct in finding that black and Hispanic voters were likely to prevail on claims that the new congressional map is an illegal gerrymander that is intended to dilute the minority vote in several districts. Alito issued the emergency order on November 21, ruling the Texas map could remain in place while the full court considers the legal challenge.

Texas urged the high court to settle the matter swiftly, warning that any change to district lines months before the March primary would cause logistical chaos for voters and likely disrupt the primary election. In addition, the state is pointing to the Purcell rule, which generally advises federal courts not to intervene in district map challenges and ballot rules close to an election.

“The district court’s injunction comes far too late in the day under Purcell. Campaigns have begun in the 2025 districts. The candidate filing period ends on December 8. Ballots will then soon be printed, checked and re-checked, and sent overseas. In the middle of all of that, the district court has ordered the State to stop,” Texas Solicitor General William R. Peterson wrote in the state’s emergency appeal filed late last week. He continued: “Worse, because there is no time for remedial proceedings by the district court’s own admission, the district court has ordered the State to replace the 2025 districts in medias res with repealed redistricting legislation—reviving the 2021 map that changes all but one of Texas’s 38 congressional districts, in many cases changing them dramatically.”

A three-judge federal panel in El Paso ruled two-to-one last week that Texas’s latest redistricting plan was likely drawn with discriminatory intent. However, the majority’s ruling was blasted by U.S. Circuit Court Judge Jerry Smith in his dissent, with the jurist alleging his colleague, Judge Jeffrey Brown, had engaged in judicial misconduct.

Image by Joe Ravi.

Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.

show less
show more