Witness Tells Committee Extended Ballot‑Receipt Deadlines Undermine Confidence; Litigation Cited

A committee member asked Mister Noble to explain his written testimony arguing that accepting ballots after election day may violate federal law and harm voter confidence. The member linked timely reporting with public trust and asked Noble to elaborate.

Mister Noble responded that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit had taken a similar view and said his organization has been litigating the issue for five years. "We sued them 4 years ago. We're currently suing California, Oregon, and Illinois," he said, and argued Congress intended election day to end on election day. He described a pattern of extended deadlines that, he said, produces "two weeks of post election uncertainty" and noted examples where additional ballots arrive days after in‑person counting has started, saying at one point people "find out there's an additional 150,000 ballots coming in." These figures were presented as part of his argument about public trust and the unpredictability created by staggered receipt deadlines.

The committee member cited Florida's experience as a counterexample, saying the state can complete counting and "have results by 09:00," using that claim to argue timely tabulation is feasible. (The transcript does not specify the time zone for that claim.)

The witness also emphasized the need for clean voter registration lists to prevent fraud and said some states are not complying with National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) obligations; he said litigation has been brought against North Carolina and that suits are ongoing in other states. The exchange was a discussion of legal interpretation, litigation, and policy effects rather than an enactment of new law or a formal committee directive.