Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Voter rolls in Pittsburgh littered with multiple registrations and the dead, suit claims

Voter fraud

The Public Interest Legal Foundation has filed another in a series of lawsuits claiming that election officials are not doing a good job of maintaining voter registration rolls, opening up the possibility of voter fraud.

Tollikoff Photography/Getty Images

The voter rolls in Pennsylvania's second biggest county are a mess and election officials are not doing enough to clean them up, according to a lawsuit filed this week.

Public Interest Legal Foundation, a conservative group focused on election integrity, filed the suit Monday in federal court against David Voye, manager of elections for Allegheny County (which includes Pittsburgh) and members of the county's board of elections.

It is the sixth federal lawsuit filed by the foundation in less than two years highlighting the problems that election officials have in keeping their lists of eligible voters up to date. Other suits have targeted Maryland, Maine, North Carolina, the county that includes Houston and the city of Detroit.


Another conservative group, Judicial Watch, has filed a series of five similar lawsuits in recent years, entering into consent decrees mandating that the voter rolls be cleaned up in California, Indiana, Kentucky, Ohio and Montgomery County, Md., a Washington, D.C. suburb. In January, Judicial Watch sent out letters threatening to sue 19 counties in five states if they did not clean up their voting rolls.

What's at stake, according to these groups and their supporters, is the integrity of our elections and the potential for voter fraud. But critics argue that overly aggressive efforts to clean up voter rolls in the name of virtually nonexistent examples of fraud have improperly removed thousands of people from the registration lists, possibly leaving them unable to vote in the next election. The harshest critics see a conspiracy to remove minority voters from the rolls.

In the Allegheny County lawsuit, the foundation states that it issued a report two years ago documenting that people who had moved, died or who were not citizens were on the voter registration rolls.

The foundation again reviewed the voter registration list provided by the county in October 2019 and found nearly 4,000 records of people who were registered twice, three times and in some cases four or more times. One person, the suit states, is registered seven times in the county,

In addition, investigators found more than 1,500 dead people were still registered to vote along with hundreds of voter registration records that lacked correct birthdates and suffered from other clerical errors.

The suit, like many of the others, claims that the county is violating the National Voter Registration Act of 1993, which requires election officials to establish a maintenance plan for keeping the voter registration rolls accurate and to execute that plan. The NVRA is also known as the motor voter law because it made it easier for people to get registered to vote, including by asking people to register when they get their vehicle registrations renewed. That and other efforts caused a swell in the voter rolls in many locations.

The county has 890,785 registered voters, according to the latest figures from the Pennsylvania Department of State. That is about 90 percent of the estimated voting age population, going by the census.

Looking at places where the number of people registered comes close to or exceeds the estimated population 18 years or older is one technique that these conservative groups have used to spot possible problem areas.

Voye, the county election official, said in a statement issued to the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette that his biggest concern is that everyone eligible gets a chance to vote and that no one is improperly removed from the voter rolls.

Christian Adams, president of the Public Interest Legal Foundation, was a member of the short-lived, ill-fated Presidential Commission on Election Integrity established by President Trump to track down allegations of widespread voter fraud in the 2016 election. Those claims were never verified.

The Allegheny County suit asks the court to find that election officials are violating NVRA, to order them to remove ineligible people from the registration rolls, and to "implement reasonable and effective registration list maintenance programs.'


Read More

Voters lining up to vote.

Voters line up at the Oak Lawn Branch Library voting center on Primary Election Day in Dallas on March 3, 2026. Republicans' decision to hold a split primary from the Democrats and to eliminate countywide voting forced Dallas County voters to cast ballots at assigned neighborhood precincts, leading to confusion. Republicans have now decided to use countywide polling locations for the May 26 runoff election.

Shelby Tauber for The Texas Tribune

Dallas County GOP Will Agree To Use Countywide Voting Sites for May 26 Runoff Election

Dallas County Republicans will agree to allow voters to cast ballots at countywide voting sites for the May 26 runoff election after a switch to precinct-based voting sites caused chaos, the county party chair said Tuesday.

Dallas County Republican Chairman Allen West supported the use of precinct-based sites earlier this month, but said using precincts again for the runoff would expose the county party to “increased risk and voter confusion” because the county is planning to use countywide sites for upcoming municipal elections and early voting.

Keep ReadingShow less
People at voting booths.

A clear breakdown of voter ID laws under the Constitution, federal statutes, and court rulings—plus analysis of new Trump administration proposals to impose nationwide voter identification requirements.

Getty Images, LPETTET

Just the Facts: Voter ID, States’ Powers, and Federal Limits

The Fulcrum approaches news stories with an open mind and skepticism, presenting our readers with a broad spectrum of viewpoints through diligent research and critical thinking. As best we can, remove personal bias from our reporting and seek a variety of perspectives in both our news gathering and selection of opinion pieces. However, before our readers can analyze varying viewpoints, they must have the facts.


Few issues generate more heat and are less understood than voter ID.

Keep ReadingShow less
A person signing a piece of paper with other people around them.

Javon Jackson, center, was able to register to vote following passage of a 2019 Nevada law that restored voting rights to formerly incarcerated individuals.

The Nation Is Missing Millions of Voters Due to Lack of Rights for Former Felons

If you gathered every American with a prison record into one contiguous territory and admitted it to the union, you would create the 12th-largest state. It would be home to at least 7 million to 8 million people and hold a dozen votes in the Electoral College.

In a close presidential race, this hypothetical state of the formerly incarcerated could decide who wins the White House.

Keep ReadingShow less
With the focus on the voting posters, the people in the background of the photo sign up to vote.

An analysis of Trump’s SAVE Act strategy, the voter ID debate, and how Pew data is being misused—exploring election integrity, voter suppression, and the political fight shaping U.S. democracy.

Getty Images, SDI Productions

Stop Fighting Voter ID. Start Defining It.

President Trump doesn't need the SAVE America Act to pass. He only needs the debate to continue. Every minute spent arguing about voter suppression repeats the underlying premise — that noncitizen voting is a real and widespread problem — until it feels like an established fact. The question is whether Democrats will contest Republicans’ definition before the frame hardens.

Trump's claim that 88% of Americans support the bill traces to a Pew Research Center survey — a survey that found 83% support a “government-issued photo ID to vote,” not extreme vetting for proof of citizenship. That support included 95% of Republicans and 71% of Democrats, indicating genuine, broad, bipartisan support for a basic civic principle. That's worth taking seriously.

Keep ReadingShow less