Federal Prosecution of Election Offenses

Guidance from the Justice Department, through several editions, that federal officials do not stop election crimes before or during elections. They investigate and prosecute after elections.

Edition 8 - 2017, under Trump	7 - 2007, under Bush	6 - 1995, under Clinton	5- -1988, under Reagan	4 - 1984, under Reagan	2 – 1980, under Carter
justice.gov/criminal/file/1029066/download	justice.gov/sites/default/files/criminal/legacy/2013/09/30/electbook-rvs0807.pdf	books.google.com/books?id=-yUw316aC8oC&printsec=frontcover	books.google.com/books?id=i7Kg1wuAVCkC&printsec=frontcover	books.google.com/books?id=xbjEICugBrYC&printsec=frontcover	researchgate.net/publication/327814629_Federal_ Prosecution_of_Election_Offenses_2nd_Edition
Election Day Program emphasizes the detection, evaluation, and prosecution of crimes. As a general rule, except for the activities covered by the federal voting rights laws, the Department does not have authority to directly intercede in the election process itself.	Election Day Program emphasizes the detection, evaluation, and prosecution of crimes. As a general rule, except for the activities covered by the federal voting rights laws, the Department does not have authority to directly intercede in the election process itself.	Election Day Program emphasizes the detection, evaluation, and prosecution of crimes – not their prevention. As a general rule, the Department has neither the responsibility nor the authority to intercede in the election process itself.	As with all election matters, the emphasis is on detection, evaluation, and prosecution rather than on prevention.	As with all election matters, the emphasis is on detection, evaluation, and prosecution rather than on prevention.	As with all election matters, the emphasis is on detection, evaluation, and prosecution rather than on prevention.
4. Non-interference with Elections The Justice Department’s goals in the area of election crime are to prosecute those who violate federal criminal law and, through such prosecutions, to deter corruption of future elections. The Department does not have a role in determining which candidate won a particular election, or whether another election should be held because of the impact of the alleged fraud on the election. In most instances, these issues are for the candidates to litigate in the courts or to advocate before their legislative bodies or election boards.	4. Non-interference with Elections The Justice Department’s goals in the area of election crime are to prosecute those who violate federal criminal law and, through such prosecutions, to deter corruption of future elections. The Department does not have a role in determining which candidate won a particular election, or whether another election should be held because of the impact of the alleged fraud on the election. In most instances, these issues are for the candidates to litigate in the courts or to advocate before their legislative bodies or election boards.	Federal Role: Prosecution, Not Intervention It is the states that have authority to assure that political campaigns are waged honestly, that only qualified individuals register and vote, and that the polling process is conducted fairly. The federal prosecutor's role in election matters, on the other hand, focuses on prosecuting individuals who commit election crimes. Deterrence of future similar crimes is a natural and important objective of federal prosecution. However this deterrence is sought by public awareness of the Department's prosecutive interest in election fraud, and through successful convictions of those who corrupt the election process – not through interference with the process itself.	The Justice Department's function is to investigate and prosecute persons who violate federal law, and not to intercede in the elective process itself. See In re Higdon, 269 F. 150 (E.D. Mo. 1920). Except where racially motivated conduct is present, there is no statutory basis for federal lawsuits to halt alleged electoral abuse. The role of the Department of Justice in these matters has been not to interfere with ongoing elections, but rather to investigate and prosecute, after the election is over, those who broke the law.	The Justice Department's function is to investigate and prosecute persons who violate federal law, and not to intercede in the elective process itself. See In re Higdon, 269 F. 150 (E.D. Mo. 1920). Except where racially motivated conduct is present, there is no statutory basis for federal lawsuits to halt alleged electoral abuse. The role of the Department of Justice in these matters has been not to interfere with ongoing elections, but rather to investigate and prosecute those who broke the law after the election is over.	The Department's function is to investigate and prosecute persons who violate the law, and not to intercede in the elective process itself. Except where racially motivated conduct is involved, there is no statutory basis for Federal lawsuits to halt alleged electoral abuse. The role of the Department of Justice in these matters has been not to interfere with ongoing elections, but rather to investigate and prosecute those who broke the law after the election is over.
In investigating an election fraud matter, federal law enforcement personnel should carefully evaluate whether an investigative step under consideration has the potential to affect the election itself. Starting a public criminal investigation of alleged election fraud before the election to which the allegations pertain has been concluded runs the obvious risk of chilling legitimate voting and campaign activities. It also runs the significant risk of interjecting the investigation itself as an issue, both in the campaign and in the adjudication of any ensuing election contest.	In investigating an election fraud matter, federal law enforcement personnel should carefully evaluate whether an investigative step under consideration has the potential to affect the election itself. Starting a public criminal investigation of alleged election fraud before the election to which the allegations pertain has been concluded runs the obvious risk of chilling legitimate voting and campaign activities. It also runs the significant risk of interjecting the investigation itself as an issue, both in the campaign and in the adjudication of any ensuing election contest.	Since the federal prosecutor's function in the area of election crimes is not primarily preventive, any criminal investigation by the Department must be conducted in a way that eliminates, or at least minimizes, the possibility that the investigation itself will become a factor in the election.	The normal posture of the federal Government in election fraud matters is to refrain from intervening in an ongoing elective contest in such a way that the investigation is allowed to become a campaign issue.	The normal posture of the federal Government in election fraud matters is to refrain from intervening in an ongoing elective contest in such a way that the investigation is allowed to become a campaign issue.	The normal posture of the Federal Government in election fraud matters is to refrain from intervening in an ongoing elective contest in such a way that the investigation is allowed to become a campaign issue.
Accordingly, overt criminal investigative measures should not ordinarily be taken in matters involving alleged fraud in the manner in which votes were cast or counted until the election in question has been concluded, its results certified, and all recounts and election contests concluded. Not only does such investigative restraint avoid interjecting the federal government into election campaigns, the voting process, and the adjudication of ensuing recounts and election contest litigation, but it also ensures that evidence developed during any election litigation is available to investigators, thereby minimizing the need to duplicate investigative efforts. Many election fraud issues are developed to the standards of factual predication for a federal criminal investigation during post-election litigation.	Accordingly, overt criminal investigative measures should not ordinarily be taken in matters involving alleged fraud in the manner in which votes were cast or counted until the election in question has been concluded, its results certified, and all recounts and election contests concluded. Not only does such investigative restraint avoid interjecting the federal government into election campaigns, the voting process, and the adjudication of ensuing recounts and election contest litigation, but it also ensures that evidence developed during any election litigation is available to investigators, thereby minimizing the need to duplicate investigative efforts. Many election fraud issues are developed to the standards of factual predication for a federal criminal investigation during post-election litigation.	With very few exceptions, no overt investigation, and no interviews with individual voters, should occur until after the election allegedly affected is over. While the Department cannot prevent a complainant from publicizing allegations, care should be taken to avoid providing the complainant with any information which might be used to affect the election process. G INVESTIGATIVE CONSIDERATIONS IN ELECTION FRAUD CASES Another limitation affects voter interviews. Election fraud cases often depend on the testimony of individual voters whose votes were co-opted in one way or another. But voters should not be interviewed, or other voter-related investigation done, until after the election is over.	This customarily requires that most, if not all, investigation of a matter await the conclusion of the election involved.	This customarily requires that most, if not all, investigation of a matter await the conclusion of the election involved.	This customarily requires that most, if not all, investigation of a matter await the conclusion of the election at issue.
Although civil rights actions under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 may be brought by private citizens to redress election irregularities, the federal prosecutor has no role in such suits.	Although civil rights actions under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 may be brought by private citizens to redress election irregularities, the federal prosecutor has no role in such suits.	Finally, Although civil rights actions under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 may be brought by private citizens to redress election irregularities, the federal prosecutor has no role in such suits. There are often several ways to address election fraud besides prosecution. These include administrative action by election officials to correct a problem, and litigation to challenge apparent election outcomes. The department of Justice has no role in such matters...	Private suits may be brought in federal court concerning election matters under 42 U.S.C. 1983. However the Justice Department does not intercede in such private matters.	Private suits may be brought in federal court concerning election matters under 42 U.S.C. 1983. However the Justice Department does not intercede in such private matters.	Private suits may be brought in Federal court concerning election matters under 42 U.S.C. 1983. However, the Justice Department does not intercede in such private matters.
ELECTION DAY PROCEDURES Election Day Program calls upon the Department’s 93 United States Attorneys to designate one or more senior Assistant United States Attorneys (AUSAs) to serve a two-year term as District Election Officer (DEO) for his or her district. ... Before significant elections – • The Justice Department issues a press release emphasizing the federal interests in prosecuting election crime and protecting voting rights. • Similar press releases are then issued throughout the country by each United States Attorney. • Each United States Attorney and District Election Officer is encouraged to meet with the state and, if possible, local officials responsible for the administration of the election process and the prosecution of crimes against that process. The purpose of these meetings is to convey federal interest in assuming an appropriate law enforcement role with respect to electoral corruption, and to make federal assets and personnel available to assist the states in such matters.	ELECTION DAY PROCEDURES Election Day Program calls upon the Department’s 93 United States Attorneys to designate one or more senior Assistant United States Attorneys (AUSAs) to serve a two-year term as District Election Officer (DEO) for his or her district. ... Before significant elections – • The Justice Department issues a press release emphasizing the federal interests in prosecuting election crime and protecting voting rights. • Similar press releases are then issued throughout the country by each United States Attorney. • Each United States Attorney and District Election Officer is encouraged to meet with the state and, if possible, local officials responsible for the administration of the election process and the prosecution of crimes against that process. The purpose of these meetings is to convey federal interest in assuming an appropriate law enforcement role with respect to electoral corruption, and to make federal assets and personnel available to assist the states in such matters.	Federal Election Day Procedures The Election Day Program calls for each United States Attorney to designate one or more senior Assistant United States Attorneys to serve a two-year term as District Election Officer... A few days before the November federal elections – • The Justice Department issues a press release emphasizing the federal interest and role in prosecuting election crime. • Similar press releases are then issued throughout the country by each United States Attorney.	Election Day Procedures ... Special procedures are employed by Departmental, Bureau and United States Attorney personnel during and immediately before each national general election. These normally include the appointment of a senior Assistant United States Attorney in each District to serve as the "Election Day Officer," assuring the availability of Special Agents to investigate election-related complaints throughout the judicial district, and coordination of on-the-scene responses to these complaints.	Election Day Procedures ... Special procedures are employed by Departmental, Bureau and United States Attorney personnel during and immediately before each national general election. These normally include the appointment of a senior Assistant United States Attorney in each District to serve as "Election Day Officer," assuring the availability of Special Agents to investigate election-related complaints throughout the judicial district, and coordination of the on-the-scene response to these complaints.	Election Day Procedures ... Special procedures are employed by Departmental, Bureau and United States Attorney personnel during and immediately before each national general election. These normally include the appointment of a senior Assistant United States Attorney in each District to serve as "Election Day Officer," assuring the availability of Special Agents to investigate election-related complaints through the judicial district, and coordination of the on-the-scene response to these complaints.
The telephone number of each AUSA serving as a District Election Officer is publicized locally, as well as the telephone numbers of the local offices of the FBI. Citizens are encouraged to bring complaints of possible election fraud to the attention of these law enforcement officials.	The telephone number of each AUSA serving as a District Election Officer is publicized locally, as well as the telephone numbers of the local offices of the FBI. Citizens are encouraged to bring complaints of possible election fraud to the attention of these law enforcement officials.	The telephone number of each AUSA serving as District Election Officer is publicized locally, as well as the telephone numbers of the local offices of the FBI. Citizens are encouraged to bring complaints of possible election fraud to the attention of these law enforcement officials...	The name of the Election Day Officer, and the telephone number at which citizen complaints may be made during the election, should be published in the media...	The name of the Election Day Officer, and the telephone number at which citizen complaints may be made during the election, should be published in the media...	The name of the Election Day Officer, and the telephone number at which citizen complaints may be made during the election, should be published in the local media...
On election day – • In each district, the District Election Officer receives and handles election fraud allegations. • FBI Special Agents are made available in each district to receive election-related complaints from all sources... Special attention is given to preserving evidence that may lose its integrity with the passage of time.	On election day – • In each district, the District Election Officer receives and handles election fraud allegations. • FBI Special Agents are made available in each district to receive election-related complaints from all sources... Special attention is given to preserving evidence that may lose its integrity with the passage of time.	On election day -- • In each district, the District Election Officer receives and handles election fraud allegations. • FBI Special Agents are made available in each district to receive election-related complaints from all sources... Special attention is given to preserving evidence that may lose its integrity with the passage of time.	Special attention is given to preserving evidence that might lose its integrity with the passage of time...	Special attention is given to preserving evidence that might lose its integrity with the passage of time...	Special attention is given during an Election to complaints involving observable irregularities and to preserving evidence that might lose its integrity with the passage of time.
• Under certain circumstances, FBI Headquarters may authorize its agents to conduct covert operations before, during, or after the election upon request of the Public Integrity Section. However, such operations must be predicated on preexisting evidence that observable or otherwise detectable illegal activities (such as vote buying) are likely to occur in that election.	• Under certain circumstances, FBI Headquarters may authorize its agents to conduct covert operations before, during, or after the election upon request of the Public Integrity Section. However, such operations must be predicated on preexisting evidence that observable or otherwise detectable illegal activities (such as vote buying) are likely to occur in that election.	Under exceptional circumstances, FBI headquarters will authorize its agents to conduct surveillance of open polling places, upon request of the Public Integrity Section. However, such surveillance must be predicated on preexisting evidence that observable illegal activities (such as vote-buying) are likely to occur in the immediate vicinity of a specific open poll. Visual surveillance in such instances is directed at obtaining evidence for use in subsequent prosecutions, not at preventing or terminating the illegal conduct.	Under exceptional circumstances, stationary surveillance of open polling places by the Bureau may be authorized by the Public Integrity Section of the Criminal Division. However, such surveillance must be predicated on pre-existing evidence that observable illegal activities (such as vote-buying) are likely to occur in the immediate vicinity of a specific open poll. The visual surveillance by the Bureau in such instances is directed at amassing evidence for use in subsequent prosecutions, and not at preventing or terminating the illegal conduct which is being observed.	Under exceptional circumstances, stationary surveillance of open polling places by the Bureau may be authorized by the Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division. However, such surveillance must be predicated on pre-existing evidence that observable illegal activities (such as vote-buying) are likely to occur in the immediate vicinity of a specific open poll. The visual surveillance by the Bureau in such instances is directed at amassing evidence for use in subsequent prosecutions, and not at preventing or terminating the illegal conduct being observed...	Under exceptional circumstances, stationary surveillance of open polling places by the Bureau may be authorized by the Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division. However, such surveillance must by predicated on preexisting evidence that observable illegal activities (such as vote-buying) are likely to occur in the immediate vicinity of a specific open poll. The visual surveillance by the Bureau in such instances is directed at amassing evidence for use in subsequent prosecutions, and not at preventing or terminating the illegal conduct being observed.
			Other Factors Bearing on Intervention in Electoral Abuse Matters... First, geographic areas are periodically identified where abuses of the franchise have been shown to present a peculiarly acute systemic problem... Second, efforts are made to maximize the flow of complaints concerning election abuses to federal authorities. This is done by encouraging an activist posture on the part of the Bureau and the United States Attorneys during important federal elections and through encouraging United States Attorney and Bureau personnel to conduct expeditious preliminary investigations in these matters with a view to developing adequately specific information concerning a pattern of conduct. Third, an effort is made to determine whether a pattern of election abuse is functionally related to a pattern of local corruption, or other criminal activity in a given area.	Other Factors Bearing on Intervention in Electoral Abuse Matters... First, geographic areas are periodically identified where abuses of the franchise have been shown to present a peculiarly acute systemic problem... Second, efforts are made to maximize the flow of complaints concerning election abuses to federal authorities. This is done by encouraging an activist posture on the part of the Bureau and the United States Attorneys during important federal elections and through encouraging United States Attorney and Bureau personnel to conduct expeditious preliminary investigations in these matters with a view to developing adequately specific information concerning a pattern of conduct. Third, an effort is made to determine whether a pattern of election abuse is functionally related to a pattern of local corruption, or other criminal activity in a given area.	Other Factors Bearing On Intervention In Election Abuse Matters... First, geographic areas are periodically identified where abuses of the franchise have been shown to present a particularly acute systemic problem... Second, efforts are made to maximize the flow of complaints concerning election abuses to Federal authorities. This is done by encouraging an activist posture on the part of the Bureau and the United States Attorneys during important Federal elections, and through encouraging United States Attorney and Bureau personnel to conduct expeditious preliminary investigations in these matters with a view to developing adequately specific information concerning a pattern of conduct. Third, an effort is made to determine whether a pattern of election abuse is functionally related to a pattern of local corruption, or to other criminal activity in a given area or instance.