The Senate Elections and Ethics Committee signed off on a measure that could levy fines on anyone who makes a “false statement or misrepresentation” about an election, but questions remain about some of the measure’s finer points.
Violators who make an alleged false statement, including the election date, intending to impede or prevent someone else from voting would face a fine of up to $1,000 per violation. Senate Bill 707, co-sponsored by 9 Democrats, also proposes that employers face a fine of up to $10,000 if they employ someone for election-related purposes and violate the measure.
According to a Senate Fiscal Agency review, false statements include an election’s “time, place, or manner.” It could also apply to the qualifications for or restrictions on voter eligibility, criminal penalties tied to voting in an election and a voter’s eligibility or registration status.
Go Ad-Free, Get Content, Go Premium Today - $1 Trial
A statement or misrepresentation would be considered intentional if someone knew the statement or misrepresentation was false and intended to hinder or stop another individual from exercising the individual’s right to vote in an election.
However, critics question aspects of the bill, such as how officials would determine whether someone intentionally or accidentally shared inaccurate information.
“One of the mistakes I’ve seen frequently when it comes to elections is people say you vote on the first Tuesday of November, and technically speaking, that’s not correct,” the Michigan Advance quoted state Sen. Ed McBroom, R-Vulcan, as saying. “How are we going to determine whether or not that was just typical carelessness and not understanding the nuance that it’s the first Tuesday after the first Monday, versus somebody who intentionally is trying to do this? That’s what I’m trying to drill down to.”
McBroom and Sen. Ruth Johnson, R-Holly, the committee’s two Republicans, voted “pass” on the measure, an option that is neither a “yes” nor a “no.”
Go Ad-Free, Get Content, Go Premium Today - $1 Trial
“The two Republican members passed hoping to get more clarity on the standards that would be used to prove that something is done ‘intentionally and knowingly with intent,’” Johnson told The Federalist.
The ACLU of Michigan called the measure “a critical step toward that goal by addressing intentional acts of voter misinformation that threaten the integrity of our democratic process.”
On its website, the group touts its commitment to free speech.
“Freedom of speech is protected in the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights and is guaranteed to all Americans,” the group said on its website. “…Safeguarding this cherished freedom is the ACLU’s ongoing commitment.”
The push follows a case in Detroit stemming from robocalls made during the 2020 election discouraging mail-in voting. Attorney General Dana Nessel filed charges against Jack Burkman and Jacob Wohl, claiming they orchestrated a series of robocalls intending to suppress predominantly black voters.
Burkman and Wohl appealed to the state’s Court of Appeals and the Michigan Supreme Court.
In June, the Michigan Supreme Court ruled 5-2 to narrow the definition of voter intimidation. Nessel said the ruling confirms the state’s law against voter intimidation, which bars intentional false speech about voting requirements or procedures if it attempts to deter or influence a vote.
The measure is among a spate of bills Michigan Democrats are forcing through during the lame-duck session and before they lose their trifecta control of the state government.