Contesting a Presidential Election, and More from CRS
The feasibility of challenging the outcome of a presidential election is examined in a new report from the Congressional Research Service.
“If legitimate and verifiable allegations of voting fraud, or indications of misconduct by election officials on election day are presented, what legal recourses are available to complainants to litigate and potentially to remedy such wrongs and to contest the result of a presidential election?” the report inquires.
Although the presidential election is a national event, it is actually comprised of fifty separate state elections, plus the one in the District of Columbia.
Therefore, “it is an individual state that has the initial responsibility for resolving a challenge, recount, or contest to the results of a presidential election within that jurisdiction,” wrote CRS Legislative Attorney Jack Maskell. See Legal Processes for Contesting the Results of a Presidential Election, October 24, 2016.
Other new and updated reports from the Congressional Research Service include the following.
Partisan Political Activities and Federal Workers: Questions in the 2016 Election, CRS Legal Sidebar, October 20, 2016
State Voter Identification Requirements: Analysis, Legal Issues, and Policy Considerations, updated October 21, 2016
Yemen: Recent Attacks Against U.S. Naval Vessels in the Red Sea, CRS Insight, October 21, 2016
U.S.-South Korea Relations, updated October 20, 2016
DHS Appropriations FY2017: Research and Development, Training, and Services, October 20, 2016
Navy Lasers, Railgun, and Hypervelocity Projectile: Background and Issues for Congress, updated October 21, 2016
Russian Compliance with the Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty: Background and Issues for Congress, October 20, 2016
Iran’s Foreign and Defense Policies, updated October 21, 2016
These ideas aim to advance the detailed policy solutions needed to foster public trust and implement fairness in the adoption of AI across diverse domains, from healthcare and government benefits to rural access, education, and worker protections.
The evidence is clear: algorithmic pay-setting is established in app-based work, and payroll/timekeeping failures show how software can produce systemic wage harm at scale
While a few states have taken steps to implement decision-making mechanisms for certain AI systems, too many leaders are simply accepting narratives about AI’s purported public benefit at face value – jumping to the “how” of AI implementation before thoroughly vetting potential systems and deciding whether they are appropriate to use at all.
When properly structured — with specific numeric targets, secured financial obligations, independent monitoring, and meaningful enforcement — CBAs transform data center deals into durable community partnerships.