More than a dozen Republican officials identified as alleged "fake electors" who signed false certifications claiming Donald Trump won their states' electoral votes during the 2020 election have re-emerged as legitimate electors for the 2024 Presidential Election. This controversial move involves electors from Pennsylvania, Nevada, and Michigan casting real votes for the president-elect, adding layers of complexity to the continuing saga surrounding the 2020 elections.
On Electoral College voting day, thirteen individuals, embroiled in legal battles from the last election, participated without reservation. This included electors from some states still facing criminal charges tied to the alleged 2020 election fraud scheme. Trump was projected to receive 312 electoral votes, compared to Vice President Kamala Harris’s projected 226, for the 2024 election.
The backdrop is troubling; as previously reported by The Washington Post, these individuals—now voting legitimately—were part of actions alleged to have been organized by Trump and his allies to fabricate alternative slates of electors as they attempted to overturn the results of the 2020 election.
According to details from ABC News, when electors gathered four years ago, transparency was scarce. Despite Trump's claims about widespread voter fraud being proven unfounded, the notion of stolen elections has taken root among many party members, creating what legal experts like Rex VanMiddlesworth define as "a badge of honor" for those who engaged without consequence.
Legal repercussions surrounding these early actions came to fruition when Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel charged 16 individuals found guilty of falsely certifying their status as electors, all of whom have since pleaded not guilty to numerous counts, including forgery and election law violations. Yet this has not halted their return. Five of the indicted Michigan individuals—held responsible for the 2020 fraud attempt—signed on again as 2024 electors, as reported by NPR.
This overlap raises questions about the accountability of those who participate without acknowledging the previous allegations against them. VanMiddlesworth emphasized the limited requirements written for electors which may shield them from disqualification. "Truthfully, their identity shouldn't affect voting intentions and should not matter," he stated, arguing about the legitimacy of their participation.
The frantic desire of some Republicans to maintain loyalty to Trump's narrative post-2020, appears to outweigh the legal ramifications they may face. Prosecutors throughout states like Georgia, Nevada, Arizona, and Wisconsin continue to mount cases against some of these electors, amid claims of voter fraud. Yet many of these cases have struggled to proceed through the legal system unscathed.
Bringing this trend forward, the current election would once again see these individuals as electors—even with prior allegations of misconduct decorating their profiles. The continuation of their political careers and participation highlights the current state of fidelity among party leadership toward Trump and his false claims about the legitimacy of the elections.
"There’s nothing really untoward this year about what they're doing," maintained VanMiddlesworth, pointing to the passing of the Electoral Count Reform and Presidential Transition Improvement Act of 2022, which has streamlined certification procedures and mitigated confusion about the roles of electors.
Interestingly, among those from Pennsylvania who entered the voting hall for Trump, history cast its shadow. A review of the lists showed some certified electors fighting charges from 2020 but participating without hesitation.
The legal situations from states continue to develop, with varying levels of progress being made. This includes instances where challenges to indictments have delayed decisions, letting questions of integrity linger over the Republican Party’s current dynamics.
"I think it’s evidence of how deeply ingrained the belief in the party is—about the 2020 election being stolen," noted VanMiddlesworth. This claim points to an ideological battle still waging within the party, with the occurrences of electors effectively voting—despite their past actions—as emblematic of larger discord.
Covering the broader spectrum of governmental integrity, the actions of these self-proclaimed electors encapsulate the heightened tensions among factions of both political parties as the election season nears. Historical themes of accountability juxtaposed against party loyalty will undoubtedly remain focal points as elector selections continue.
While many of these cases derive from the shadows of 2020, the legitimacy of the electoral process stands reflected through the lens of this year’s participants. It begs discussion: How will these repeated actions shape party views going forward?
With the return of previously indicted electors is shaping perceptions and loyalties, the eyes of watchful critics will remain fixed on how the 2024 elections play out, especially considering the widespread dismissal of accountability surrounding the 2020 elections. It emphasizes the narrative of repeated accountability, showing how resilient, yet contentious, the march toward electoral practices can be.
Whether the shifts seen currently indicate progress or decay within electoral integrity remains to be seen. Yet, with participation from those tensions among elected officials, the discussions surrounding the echoes of 2020 will undoubtedly persist as we head toward the future.
