RNC Sues Michigan Over Residency Rules for Overseas Voters

Republican National Committee Initiates Lawsuit Against Michigan's Overseas Voting Regulations

The Republican National Committee (RNC) has filed a lawsuit against the state of Michigan, aiming to challenge the state's provisions on absentee voting for residents living abroad. At the heart of the legal dispute is a Michigan law that allows U.S. citizen spouses and dependents of Michigan voters residing outside the United States to cast absentee ballots without having ever lived in Michigan themselves. This practice requires that these voters accompany the Michigan citizen overseas and that they are not registered in any other jurisdiction.

The lawsuit asserts that this arrangement violates the Michigan Constitution, which mandates that individuals eligible to vote must have resided in the state for a minimum of six months. The RNC argues that the legislature's definition of residency must adhere to this requirement. Additionally, the legal action questions the authority of Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson in issuing guidance regarding overseas voting, claiming her directives extend beyond her legal mandate.

In a statement, Jim Runestad, Chair of the Michigan Republican Party, commented, "Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson’s guidance violates the Michigan Constitution by allowing people who have never resided in this state to register to vote in Michigan elections." He emphasized that the relevant laws are unequivocal in their stipulation that residency is essential for voter eligibility in Michigan.

This lawsuit is reminiscent of a previous challenge brought by the Michigan GOP ahead of the 2024 general election, which criticized Benson's instructions but did not directly contest the statute itself. Both the Michigan Court of Claims and the state Court of Appeals dismissed that earlier case, citing concerns regarding the proximity of its filing to the general election.

Judge Sima Patel of the Court of Claims, while dismissing the earlier lawsuit on procedural grounds, did address the merits of the case, noting that federal courts have nullified residency requirements similar to Michigan's. She referred to a precedent set by a 1972 U.S. Supreme Court ruling, suggesting that issues raised about state law aligning with Michigan’s six-month residency requirement are misplaced. Travis Patel indicated that this residency rule parallels a prior voting age limit of 21 years that was superseded by the U.S. Constitution's provision allowing voting at 18 years.

Judge Patel remarked, “Much like the 21-year age requirement, Const 1963, art 2, § 1’s six-month state residency requirement is no longer valid law.” However, the Judge’s statement did not specifically consider another provision in the Michigan Constitution which permits legislators to amend residency rules solely for presidential and vice-presidential elections, an aspect noted in the RNC lawsuit.

The Michigan Department of State has yet to respond to this ongoing legal challenge.