Hodgson Russ Prevails Before New York State Court of Appeals on Constitutionality of Election Law Provision Pertaining to Treatment and Canvassing of Mail-In Ballots
On October 31, 2024, the firm obtained a unanimous decision from the New York State Court of Appeals affirming the constitutionality of a provision of the Election Law related to mail-in ballots. The firm represented the New York State Assembly and its leadership, Speaker Carl Heastie and Majority Leader Crystal Peoples-Stokes.
In September of 2023, several political parties and candidates commenced a lawsuit in Saratoga County Supreme Court, launching a broad attack challenging the constitutionality of Chapter 763 of the Laws of 2021, which enacted several provisions to the New York Election Law related to mail-in ballots. The statute made significant changes to the process for canvassing absentee ballots in order to permit elections officials to tabulate results on Election Day. The challengers also named the State, the Governor, and the Senate leadership as defendants.
Ruling on motions to dismiss, Saratoga County Supreme Court upheld all but one provision of the challenged statute – Election Law Section 9-209(2)(g). This provision directs that when two elections commissioners disagree over certain aspects of a mail-in ballot, the ballot would nonetheless be counted. In enacting the statute, the Legislature determined that mail-in ballots should be treated like in-person voting and carry the same presumptions in favor of the voter. Saratoga County Supreme Court held that the canvassing of the ballot in the face of a disagreement between the commissioners did not satisfy the requirements of the Constitution, and struck this provision as unconstitutional.
On an expedited elections appeal, the Third Department reversed in a 3-2 decision. Amedure v. State, 232 A.D.3d 48 (3d Dep’t2024). The majority held that there were significant protections under the Election Law and adequate remedies for judicial review. The Court recognized the authority of the Legislature to determine the manner of elections, and therefore found the provision to be constitutional.
Given the constitutional issue, the plaintiffs appealed as of right to the Court of Appeals. The Court heard oral argument on an expedited basis and, just two weeks later, the Court issued a unanimous per curiam decision affirming the Third Department. Amedure v. State, 43 N.Y.3d 116 (2024). As stated by the Court of Appeals, the statute does not violate the Constitution or the principles of separation of powers and is consistent with constitutional requirements. In reaching this conclusion, the Court of Appeals analyzed the history of the 1894 constitutional convention and the statute at issue, including interpretive case law. The Court affirmed the Third Department’s decision that Election Law Section 9-209(2)(g) is constitutionally sound.
This was a nearly identical challenge to the one lodged in 2023, in which the firm prevailed before the Third Department on appeal. In the 2023 case, the Third Department rejected a broad challenge to the legislation, finding that the case was barred by the doctrine of laches because it was filed so close to Election Day. Amedure v. State, 210 A.D.3d 1134 (3d Dep’t 2022).
This final outcome confirms that, in New York, mail-in ballots will be treated consistently with the provisions of the Election Law, thus resolving a dispute raised in two separate cases in two separate years, each with appeals.
The case received notable media attention in both local and national media outlets: