A case questioning the accuracy of the 2024 Presidential and Senate election results centering around Rockland County, New York, is moving forward, according to a news release from the plaintiff, SMART Legislation, a watchdog group.
Several voters in that county said they cast ballots for U.S. Senate candidate Diane Sare, but the official tally for Rockland County showed zero votes for Sare.
According to the news release, Judge Rachel Tanguay of the New York Supreme Court on June 19 ruled that discovery in the case must proceed.
SMART Legislation says they are seeking a full hand recount of the Presidential and U.S. Senate races in Rockland County.
Western States
The New York case isn’t the only instance of irregularities or statistical anomalies being investigated.
Last Tuesday, Rep. Abe Hamadeh (R-AZ) announced that he sent a letter to Bondi requesting an investigation into credible claims that an elections service provider breached protocols during Arizona’s 2024 General Election.
Rep. Hamadeh requested an investigation into the handling of ballots from several western states by Runbeck Election Services.
The congressman cited credible reports that boxes of printed blank ballots from several western states were improperly mixed in a warehouse with returned voted mail ballots that were in the process of being prepared for tabulation.
“This alarming situation raises serious questions about the security and integrity of the election process in Maricopa County and potentially beyond.
“The comingling of blank ballots with live ballots poses a significant risk to the accuracy and fairness of election results.
“It is crucial that we have confidence in the integrity of our elections, and any potential mishandling of ballots must be investigated to ensure that the will of the voters is accurately reflected,” wrote Congressman Hamadeh.
Congressman Hamadeh is requesting an examination of:
- The circumstance surrounding the mixing of blank ballots with voted ballots in the Runbeck warehouse
- The security measures in place to prevent such incidents and whether they were followed
- The potential impact on the accuracy of election results in Maricopa County and any other affected areas
- Any other relevant factors that may have comprised the integrity of the 2024 elections.
SMART Legislation Case
The New York case is based on several sworn affidavits.
Lulu Friesdat, founder and executive director of SMART Legislation, said in a statement:
“There is clear evidence that the senate results are incorrect, and there are statistical indications that the presidential results are highly unlikely,” stated
“If the results are incorrect, it is a violation of the constitutional rights of each person who voted in the 2024 Rockland County general election.
“The best way to determine if the results are correct is to examine the paper ballots in a full public, transparent hand recount of all presidential and senate ballots in Rockland County.
“We believe it’s vitally important, especially in the current environment, to be absolutely confident about the results of the election.”
The original complaint states that more voters have sworn they voted for independent U.S. Senate candidate Diane Sare than the Rockland County Board of Elections counted and certified, directly contradicting those results.
Additionally, plaintiffs say the presidential election results exhibit numerous statistical anomalies, including multiple districts where hundreds of voters selected Democratic candidate Kirsten Gillibrand for Senate, but zero votes were recorded for Democratic Presidential candidate Kamala Harris.
Additionally, a statistician determined that the 2024 presidential election results were statistically highly unlikely in four of the five towns in Rockland County when compared with 2020 results.
Professor Max Bonamente, Ph.D., a statistics expert from the University of Alabama in Huntsville said the “data would require extreme sociological or political causes for their explanation, and would benefit from further assurances as to their fidelity.”
Discovery could give both the court and the public a window into what issues in Rockland County are contributing to irregularities in the election results.
Because the source of the discrepancies is unknown, a court-ordered recount could alter the election results or reveal issues in other races.
Undervotes in Texas
According to election results from the November 2024 in Texas, several counties reported significant undervotes that election watchers say should be officially scrutinized.
The 2024 election cycle has been characterized as a very divisive and contentious presidential race, with voters very much polarized, according to national polling.
And yet, election results show 8,818 voters in Harris County — one of Texas’ most Democratic-leaning counties — decided to not cast ballots in the presidential race after standing in line for hours.
Similar results were reported in most Texas counties, to a lesser degree.
In Tom Green County, for instance, 2024 election results indicate 246 voters declined to weigh-in on the presidential race.
In Crockett County, there were 60 undervotes for president.
In aggregate, these numbers add up to significant amounts, but few counties in the state performed a rigorous hand count to confirm the undervotes were accurate.
Last-Minute Election Software Updates
On June 10, several national news outlets circulated unconfirmed reports from the Substack author “Dissent In Bloom” claiming updates to election software used in 40 percent of United States counties were updated just ahead of the election under “de minimus” rules which bypass scrutiny, meaning that no additional testing is required for the updates to be installed.
The machines in question are from Omaha, Nebraska-based Election Systems & Software (ES&S).
According to experts, that increases the risk of malware in the updates.
The changes were not minor, according to “Dissent In Bloom.”
“These weren’t minor tweaks; they touched ballot scanners, modified audit files, and even affected machines flagged by CISA. But by calling them ‘de minimis,’ they avoided full testing, public scrutiny, and transparency,” that author wrote.
The report alleges federally accredited testing lab, Pro V&V, after signing off on “significant” changes to ES&S voting machines “vanished from public view” after the election.
Newsweek reported that in response to the allegations, Jack Cobb, the director of Pro V&V, via email, said the changes approved by the lab relate to ballot boxes, ballot bins, changing printers to newer models, adding mounting brackets and moving the location of files.
“There really is no change of any significance,” he said. Cobb also said the lab’s website was taken down and replaced with a new one in February and has been “running ever since.”
— From wire reports, press releases and Substack.
