Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the S298 Voter Protection Act topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate Judiciary hears House rewrite of S.298 with new criminal penalties for voter interference
Summary
Legislative counsel told the committee the House rewrote S.298 (renamed the Voter Protection Act) to replace four narrower prohibitions with a general prohibition on intentionally or recklessly intimidating or coercing voters or election officials; the House removed private civil causes of action, leaving enforcement to the attorney general and criminal authorities.
The Senate Judiciary committee reviewed a House-amended version of S.298, which the House retitled the "Voter Protection Act," and discussed its practical effects and enforcement changes.
A legislative counsel summarized the rewrite: the House removed four distinct criminal prohibitions from the Senate version and inserted a single generalized prohibition that makes it unlawful to "intentionally or recklessly intimidate or ... attempt to do so ... for the purpose of striking the right of the others to vote." Counsel told the committee the House language also extends protected categories to include language-minority groups and individuals with disabilities and reorganizes the offense into an existing chapter covering charitable election law.
Members pressed counsel on whether false or misleading communications to voters might fall under the bill. Counsel said reckless intimidation or obstruction could cover some cases, but application would be fact-dependent and might require judicial interpretation. Counsel also confirmed the House removed private civil causes of action; the attorney general's office will handle civil investigations and the state's criminal division will handle prosecutions.
Several members asked for additional rationale from House drafters and whether witnesses had participated in the change; counsel said no House representative was present and recommended inviting House staff or witnesses for further explanation. The committee did not vote and asked counsel to prepare a draft with the discussed clarifications for consideration the following day.
