In 2017, Equal Citizens launched three high-profile litigation projects that sought to reform the Electoral College and campaign finance. Two of the litigation projects have concluded, while one is currently being processed in the federal court system.
Equal Votes Equal Votes was a legal challenge to the constitutionality of a state's ability to allocate their electoral votes in a winner-take-all basis. Lessig argued that based on the "one person, one vote" principle already articulated by the Supreme Court in
Bush v. Gore, the winner-take-all system is unconstitutional—it is a violation of the
Equal Protection Clause that ensures all votes must be treated equally under the law. By allocating their Electoral College votes according to winner-take-all, Equal Citizens believes states effectively discard the votes of United States citizens in the vote for president. The Equal Votes litigation team is led by
Bush v. Gore lawyer
David Boies and includes attorneys from distinguished law firms across the country such as
Alston & Bird and
Steptoe & Johnson. The litigation strategy advisory team includes former White House chief ethics lawyer
Richard Painter, and legal scholars
Samuel Issacharoff and
Guy-Uriel Charles. In September 2017, Equal Citizens launched a 30-day crowdfunding campaign to raise $250,000 to fund the beginning stages of the Equal Votes project, and succeeded in meeting the funding goal before the deadline. During the campaign, the law firm of
Boies, Schiller & Flexner volunteered to lead the litigation pro bono. On February 21, 2018, under the leadership of Boies Schiller Flexner LLP, the litigation team filed four lawsuits in four states—California, Texas, Massachusetts, and South Carolina—on behalf of a diverse group of Democrats and Republicans whose votes for president do not matter in the general election under the winner-take-all system. All four cases raised constitutional claims grounded in the
Fourteenth and
First Amendments. In addition, the suits in Texas and South Carolina claimed the present system violates the
Voting Rights Act by disenfranchising minority voters. Lessig said that he hoped one of the four cases would get to the Supreme Court "before too far into the 2020 presidential cycle". The Supreme Court denied
certiorari on the Equal Vote cases in 2021.
Equal Electors In the
2016 United States presidential election, ten electors voted or attempted to vote contrary to their pledges in the Electoral College. In
Washington state, three electors were each fined $1,000 for their vote, and in Colorado, one elector was removed and two others were threatened for breaking their pledge. In 2017, Equal Citizens filed the case
Baca v. Colorado Department of State on behalf of three electors in Colorado and
Guerra v. Washington State Office of Administrative Hearings on behalf of the three electors who were fined by Washington State. In explaining the litigation, Equal Citizens' chief counsel Jason Harrow argued that "the framers of the Constitution intended presidential electors to be able to exercise independent judgment in casting their votes for president of the United States". In March 2017, an administrative law judge rejected the arguments of the Washington plaintiffs. Thurston County Superior Court Judge Carol Murphy later denied their claim in December 2017. After the ruling, Harrow said that Murphy's decision did not affect Equal Citizens' goal of eventually taking the case to the U.S. Supreme Court. The
Washington Supreme Court later upheld the fines. In April 2018, U.S. District Court Senior Judge
Wiley Y. Daniel rejected the Colorado plaintiffs' case, declaring that they lacked standing. Equal Citizens appealed the judge's decision, and a three-judge panel of the
United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit ruled 2–1 in favor of the electors, finding that Colorado's faithless elector law is unconstitutional. The Washington electors further appealed their
case to the
U.S. Supreme Court, while Colorado also appealed the decision of the Tenth Circuit. On January 17, 2020, the Supreme Court agreed to hear both cases during the 2019–2020 term. On July 6, 2020, the Court ruled unanimously against the electors, deciding that states have the power to force electors to follow the state's popular vote. Lessig said following the decision:When we launched these cases, we did it because regardless of the outcome, it was critical to resolve this question before it created a constitutional crisis. We have achieved that. Obviously, we don't believe the Court has interpreted the constitution correctly. But we are happy that we have achieved our primary objective—this uncertainty has been removed. That is progress.
End Super PACs Alaskan law limits contributions to independent political groups. But these limits are no longer enforced because of a federal court decision,
SpeechNOW.org v. FEC. Alaska, however, permits residents to file a lawsuit if the state election management body, the Alaska Public Offices Commission, is not enforcing its election law. Under these rules, on January 31, 2018, Equal Citizens brought a complaint on behalf of three Alaska citizens, including James Barnett, a former Anchorage municipal politician, claiming the Alaska Public Offices Commission did not enforce the law by letting two Alaskan super PACs accept contributions greater than the amount stipulated by Alaska law. The two super PACs involved are Interior Voters for John Coghill, an outside group that supported the election of Republican state Senate majority leader John Coghill, and Working Families of Alaska. The goal is to relitigate the federal court decision
SpeechNOW.org v. FEC that created the legal entity of super PACs. The case is currently at the Alaska Supreme Court, where it was argued in January 2021. == Campaigns ==