Michigan Supreme Court Lets GOP Sue Over Election Poll Worker Parity

The ruling clears the way for Republicans to pursue claims that the city of Flint appointed too few GOP election inspectors in 2022.

People cast their ballots during early voting for the general election at the University of Michigan Museum of Art Gallery in Ann Arbor, Mich., on Oct. 31, 2024. Jeff Kowalsky/AFP via Getty Images

The Michigan Supreme Court has ruled that the state Republican Party and the Republican National Committee (RNC) can proceed with a lawsuit accusing the city of Flint of failing to maintain partisan balance among poll workers during the 2022 elections, reversing lower court decisions that said the parties lacked standing to sue.

In a 5–1 order issued on July 14, the high court held that the Michigan GOP and RNC have a “special right and substantial interest” in ensuring equal representation of party-affiliated election inspectors, as required under Michigan law.

“The significant role played by the major political parties in this area of election law supports the conclusion that they have a unique interest, distinct from the general public, in asserting a challenge if a board of election commissioners did not ‘appoint an equal number, as nearly as possible, of election inspectors ... from each major political party,’” the Michigan Supreme Court opinion reads.

The ruling revives a case that emerged from the 2022 general election, when the Michigan Republican Party and RNC alleged that Flint’s Board of Election Commissioners violated state law by appointing far more Democratic election inspectors than Republicans.

According to court records, the GOP plaintiffs provided Flint officials with lists of Republican applicants willing to serve as election inspectors. Despite that, the city appointed only 57 Republicans out of 562 total election inspectors for the November 2022 election, after similar disparities in the August 2022 primary. The GOP alleged that Flint officials were “turning away” Republican volunteers and demanded corrective measures, including reallocating inspectors and actively recruiting more Republican workers.

In November 2022, a Genesee County Circuit Court judge dismissed the lawsuit from the bench, concluding that the Republican plaintiffs lacked standing—they were not proper parties to enforce the law’s partisan parity provisions.

The Michigan Court of Appeals upheld the dismissal in March 2024. In a published opinion, the appellate majority reasoned that Michigan’s election laws do not explicitly give state or national political parties the right to sue over overall partisan composition of poll workers. Instead, the law provides a specific mechanism for county party chairs to challenge individual election inspector appointments based on qualifications or political affiliation.

“The benefit of the partisan-composition provisions ... is conferred upon the public at large,” the majority wrote, comparing the GOP’s interest to a general public interest in election integrity.

In a dissenting opinion, Judge Kathleen Jansen argued that the GOP and RNC have a unique interest because they submit lists of proposed inspectors and have a direct stake in ensuring that Republican-affiliated workers are appointed. She warned the majority’s logic could leave no one able to challenge violations of the partisan balance law.

“Plaintiffs have unique interests in obtaining inspectors to assure that any Republican-designated candidate is fairly and equally treated during the counting process,” Jansen wrote. “This interest is unique and separate from the public at large. And it is particularly important today that parity and oversight be addressed in light of current challenges to the integrity of recent elections.”

The Supreme Court sided with Jansen’s view. In its order, the high court concluded that major political parties themselves have a distinct legal interest in maintaining partisan parity among election inspectors, tied to their statutory role in nominating workers and overseeing elections.

“There is ample support for the conclusion that plaintiffs have standing to pursue their claim through their ’special injury or right, or substantial interest, that will be detrimentally affected in a manner different from the citizenry at large,'” the Michigan Supreme Court opinion reads.

The ruling sends the case back to the Genesee Circuit Court, where the GOP plaintiffs can now press forward with their claims.

The Epoch Times has reached out to counsel representing the City of Flint for comment.