Concerns over potential changes to Michigan's electronic voting system dominated discussions at the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules meeting on June 11, 2025. Lawmakers expressed apprehension that new rules could broaden eligibility for electronic voting beyond the intended scope of the law, which currently restricts access to UOCAVA voters—primarily military personnel and overseas citizens.

Senator Tice raised alarms about language in the proposed rules that could allow future lawsuits or court orders to expand who can vote electronically. He emphasized that the original legislation was carefully crafted to maintain a narrow focus, and any liberal interpretation of the rules could lead to unintended consequences. "This is opening a barn door for a lot of intent that was not authorized by the passing of this bill last session," he warned.

The discussion highlighted specific rules that could permit additional voters to access electronic voting systems, raising questions about the integrity of the voting process. Tice pointed out that phrases like "authorized by statute or court order" could lead to significant changes in voter eligibility without legislative oversight. He argued that the language should be tightened to ensure that only court mandates, rather than mere authorizations, could alter the current framework.

In response, officials from the Secretary of State's office assured the committee that they intend to implement the rules strictly within the bounds of existing law. However, they acknowledged the potential for future legal challenges that could complicate the situation. The department's representatives noted that the rule-making process could take months or even years, underscoring the need for a clear framework to address any future court directives.

As the meeting concluded, the committee members agreed to revisit the language of the rules to ensure they align with the original legislative intent, emphasizing the importance of maintaining the integrity of Michigan's voting system. The outcome of this discussion could have lasting implications for how electronic voting is managed in the state, particularly in light of ongoing debates about accessibility and security in the electoral process.