Attempts to remove technology from SD elections lose in court after losing at the polls
SDI Productions via Getty Images
Attempts to ban tabulating machines and other technology from elections have fared no better in South Dakota courts than they did in several county elections.
This story was originally published by South Dakota Searchlight.
Attempts to ban tabulating machines and other technology from elections have fared no better in South Dakota courts than they did in several county elections.
Activists circulated petitions statewide last year that were meant to force counties to remove technology from elections by public vote. They said only hand-counting and other manual methods could ensure the integrity of elections, while election officials said voting machines and other forms of election technology have been repeatedly proven safe and effective.
Three of the initiated ordinances went to a public vote in Gregory, Tripp and Haakon counties in June. Voters defeated all three.
Commissioners in some other counties rejected the petitions and refused to place them on the ballot. They said the actions proposed by the petitions would violate federal laws, including those requiring assistive technology for disabled voters.
The anti-technology activists responded with lawsuits against at least two of those counties: Charles Mix County in the southeastern part of the state and Lawrence County in the northern Black Hills.
Nichole Braithwait, a petitioner in Lawrence County, filed an appeal that was dismissed by a court in June. Braithwait did not appeal that decision to the state Supreme Court. Instead, Braithwait — who is representing herself — sought an order from the same local court seeking to compel the county commission to accept her petitions and put her proposed ordinance to a public vote. A judge denied and dismissed Braithwait’s case in January.
In Charles Mix County, Jeffrey and Jolene Stewart, representing themselves, also requested a court order to compel the county commission to accept their rejected petitions and put their proposed ordinance to a public vote.
“The petitioners make several arguments based on a misunderstanding of the law,” the judge wrote.
Rapid City-based lawyer Sara Frankenstein, who specializes in election law, represented Lawrence and Charles Mix counties. Although not written explicitly in state law, Frankenstein said counties are able to reject petitions if they would violate state or federal laws. Clarifying that in state statute could help clear up the assertion from some petitioners that counties aren’t legally able to reject petitions, Frankenstein told South Dakota Searchlight.
“They probably didn’t read the exceptions in case law, since average people don’t have access to case law, let alone read it,” Frankenstein said.
She helped craft a failed bill during the 2024 legislative session that would have added language to state law specifying that counties may reject petitions that violate state or federal laws.
An effort by Rapid City Republican Sen. John Carley to require hand counting ballots statewide failed at the committee level during this year’s legislative session. A handful of other bills that could change South Dakota voter rights – primarily through restrictions on voter qualifications – passed the Legislature and are awaiting the governor’s consideration.
Braithwait said she is not pursuing the issue further. The Stewarts do not plan on carrying “another petition like this,” but they are considering “if it’s worth” continuing their court case.
Lawrence County is still embroiled in several other legal actions from Kate Crowley-Johnson, challenging her 18 percentage-point loss in a state Senate Republican primary. One against the Lawrence County auditor and board of commissioners is pending and two other appeals have been filed since the cases were dismissed in September. The state Supreme Court rejected her request to review one of her dismissed cases.
South Dakota Searchlight is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. South Dakota Searchlight maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Seth Tupper for questions: info@southdakotasearchlight.com.