Voter Registration Fraud Prosecutions
📌 Overview: Voter Registration Fraud
Voter registration fraud refers to the act of intentionally submitting false or misleading information on a voter registration form with the goal of affecting the integrity of the electoral process. It is distinct from voter fraud (e.g., casting a fraudulent ballot) and focuses specifically on manipulations of the voter registration process.
⚖️ Legal Framework
Voter registration fraud is prosecuted under federal and state laws:
🏛 Federal Statutes:
52 U.S.C. § 20511 — Makes it a crime to knowingly and willfully submit materially false information in registering to vote.
18 U.S.C. § 1001 — Prohibits knowingly making false statements to the federal government, which can include false registrations in federal elections.
18 U.S.C. § 371 — Conspiracy to defraud the United States (used when multiple actors are involved).
18 U.S.C. § 1341 / § 1343 — Mail and wire fraud (if used in voter registration schemes).
🏛 State Statutes:
Each state has its own election code. Many states classify voter registration fraud as a felony, particularly if it involves impersonation or multiple registrations.
⚖️ Key Legal Elements
To secure a conviction for voter registration fraud, prosecutors must typically prove:
The defendant knowingly and willfully submitted false, fictitious, or fraudulent information.
The information was material to the registration process.
The defendant intended to deceive the election officials or manipulate the process.
⚖️ Case Law – Detailed Examples
1. United States v. Saucedo, No. 1:17-cr-10023 (D. Kan. 2017)
Facts:
Crispin Rea Saucedo, a non-citizen, falsely claimed U.S. citizenship on a voter registration form in Kansas and voted in multiple federal elections.
Legal Issue:
Whether falsely claiming citizenship to register to vote constitutes a federal crime under 18 U.S.C. § 1015(f) and 52 U.S.C. § 20511.
Holding:
Saucedo pleaded guilty. The court found that falsely claiming U.S. citizenship and voting in federal elections met the threshold for prosecution under both statutes.
Significance:
Demonstrated zero tolerance for false citizenship claims on voter registration forms.
Resulted in prison time and likely deportation.
2. United States v. Ayers, 759 F.2d 959 (3d Cir. 1985)
Facts:
Ayers was charged with submitting multiple fraudulent voter registration applications using fictitious names in a scheme to inflate voter rolls.
Legal Issue:
Was the submission of fake voter registrations sufficient to sustain charges of mail fraud and conspiracy?
Holding:
Yes. The court upheld the conviction, emphasizing that any fraudulent activity affecting a federal election can trigger mail and wire fraud statutes.
Significance:
Showed that mail fraud can be applied to voter registration fraud when registration cards are mailed.
Extended liability to conspiracies.
3. United States v. McCrae Dowless (E.D.N.C. 2019)
Facts:
Dowless orchestrated a fraudulent absentee ballot and voter registration scheme during the 2016 and 2018 elections in North Carolina.
Legal Issue:
Whether altering voter registration forms and falsifying witness signatures on absentee ballots violated federal and state laws.
Holding:
Dowless pleaded guilty to voter registration fraud and other election-related offenses.
Significance:
A high-profile case that led to the invalidation of a congressional election.
Emphasized the seriousness of organized fraud in voter registration and absentee processes.
4. United States v. Thompson, No. 2:12-cr-00223 (E.D. Cal. 2012)
Facts:
Thompson, a registration drive worker, filled out and submitted voter registration cards without the knowledge of the individuals named.
Legal Issue:
Whether forging names on voter registration forms violated 52 U.S.C. § 20511.
Holding:
Thompson was convicted. The court found the act to be deliberate and aimed at meeting quotas, not actual political gain.
Significance:
Even non-partisan fraud (fraud without intent to vote) is prosecutable.
Highlights issues with quota-based registration drives.
5. People v. Barksdale, 163 Cal. App. 4th 1376 (Cal. Ct. App. 2008)
Facts:
Barksdale was hired to register voters and submitted hundreds of fraudulent voter registration forms.
Legal Issue:
Whether the submission of false forms—even without voting—amounts to election fraud under California law.
Holding:
Yes. The appellate court affirmed Barksdale’s conviction.
Significance:
Established that intent to affect the process, not actual voting, is key.
Important state-level precedent showing registration fraud as standalone crime.
6. United States v. Daniel Clayborn (E.D. Mo. 2020)
Facts:
Clayborn, a convicted felon in Missouri, falsely claimed eligibility to vote and registered multiple times despite being legally barred.
Legal Issue:
Whether knowingly registering to vote while ineligible constitutes voter registration fraud.
Holding:
Conviction upheld based on willful misrepresentation of eligibility.
Significance:
Shows that fraudulent registration by ineligible persons (felons, non-citizens) is a clear violation of federal law.
🧾 Summary Table
| Case | Jurisdiction | Key Issue | Outcome | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| U.S. v. Saucedo | D. Kan. | Non-citizen falsely claimed citizenship | Guilty plea | Fraud + immigration consequences |
| U.S. v. Ayers | 3rd Cir. | Fake names on registration forms | Conviction upheld | Use of mail fraud statute in voter fraud |
| U.S. v. McCrae Dowless | E.D.N.C. | Organized absentee and registration fraud | Guilty plea | Led to voided congressional election |
| U.S. v. Thompson | E.D. Cal. | Forged registrations to meet quotas | Convicted | Focused on fraud without political gain |
| People v. Barksdale | Cal. App. Ct. | Submitting hundreds of false registration forms | Conviction affirmed | State-level enforcement of registration fraud |
| U.S. v. Clayborn | E.D. Mo. | Felon falsely registering multiple times | Convicted | Ineligibility + multiple fraudulent attempts |
🔍 Key Takeaways
Voter registration fraud is a felony under both federal and most state laws.
The crime does not require the person to actually vote; the false registration alone is sufficient.
Prosecutors often apply mail/wire fraud or conspiracy statutes when multiple actors or communication tools are involved.
Cases range from individual misrepresentations (like felons or non-citizens registering) to organized schemes to inflate voter rolls.
Courts require willful and knowing misrepresentation for criminal liability—not honest mistakes or clerical errors.
🧩 Conclusion
Voter registration fraud prosecutions serve as a critical tool in protecting the integrity of elections. Courts have consistently upheld strict penalties where individuals or groups attempt to manipulate the voter registration process, whether for political advantage or monetary gain (e.g., registration quotas). These cases also illustrate that intent, falsity, and materiality are central to criminal liability.
RELATED Blog
0 comments