Election Denial in District of Columbia
0 Election Deniers will hold statewide election oversight power in District of Columbia in 2025.
0 Election Deniers will represent District of Columbia in Congress in 2025.
Some Election Deniers included in these totals won office in 2024 but have yet to be sworn in.
0 Election Deniers hold district-wide Office right now.
Washington, D.C., does not have a Governor. It does have an Attorney General, responsible for defending the laws of the district. Its chief election official is the executive director appointed by the District of Columbia Board of Elections. And after a presidential election, the District’s certificate of ascertainment, the official document that identifies D.C.’s electors and final popular vote count, is submitted by the Mayor of the District of Columbia.
Read more about The Roles of Our Elected Officials in Elections
No candidates match the selected filters.
How District of Columbia compares
Every state runs its own elections, with its own laws and processes. Check out how District of Columbia compares with other states in its region when it comes to Election Deniers holding state election administration jobs.
Election Denial in Mideast States
| State Commissioner of Elections | Moreinformation about Delaware | ||||||
| State Elections Board | Moreinformation about District of Columbia | ||||||
| State Elections Board | Moreinformation about Maryland | ||||||
| Moreinformation about New Jersey | |||||||
| State Elections Board | Moreinformation about New York | ||||||
| Moreinformation about Pennsylvania |
Sitting official is an Election Denier
- In Delaware, the Governor appoints the State Commissioner of Elections.
- In Washington, D.C., the Executive Director is appointed by the District of Columbia Board of Elections.
- In Maryland, the Administrator of Elections is appointed by the Maryland State Board of Elections.
- In New Jersey, the Governor appoints the Secretary of State.
- In New York, the Co-Executive Directors are appointed by the New York State Board of Elections.
- In Pennsylvania, the Governor appoints the Secretary of the Commonwealth.
0 Election Deniers have held, or have run for, district-wide Office since 2020.
Even one Election Denier with election oversight power is a threat to the will of the people. Here are the Election Deniers who have sought control over District of Columbia elections in recent years.
No candidates match the selected filters.
Beyond the ballot box
Each year, state legislators introduce thousands of bills related to elections. And in the past few years, we’ve identified a concerning trend. Across the country, state legislatures are considering bills that would make it easier for partisan actors to manipulate an election, and maybe even overturn the will of the people. We’re tracking these bills along with our partners in an ongoing series of reports called “A Democracy Crisis in the Making.” All told, in the 2023 legislative cycle, we identified 196 bills that were introduced in 39 states that would interfere with election administration. Ultimately, 21 of those bills became law across 15 states, while 7 bills were vetoed across 2 states.
The anti-democracy playbook is simple: change the rules and change the referees, in order to change the results. These bills go hand-in-hand with the Election Denier movement: They’re about taking power away from voters and making it harder for trusted election officials to do their jobs.
Legislative Interference in District of Columbia by Category
As of November 15, 2023, no bills had been introduced or were under consideration in District of Columbia. None have been enacted or adopted and none have been vetoed after passing.
- Usurping control over election results.These bills would give legislators or other state officials direct control over election outcomes.
- Requiring partisan or unprofessional election “audits” or reviews.These bills would establish vague post-election review schemes without the professional standards of traditional audits.
- Seizing power over election responsibilities.These bills would shift election administration responsibilities away from professional, nonpartisan officials and toward partisan actors in the legislature.
- Creating unworkable burdens in election administration.These bills would interfere with the basic procedures of election administration, increasing the risk of chaos and delay and enabling misleading claims of irregularity.
- Imposing disproportionate criminal or other penalties.These bills would create or expand penalties for election officials in the ordinary execution of their jobs, including criminalizing inadvertent mistakes.