Indiana loses on standing and notice claims.  A win for the plaintiffs in True the Vote/Judicial Watch v. Indiana.  You can read the federal court ruling here.

• The court affirmed both Judicial Watch’s and True the Vote’s theories of standing (pp. 5-9). The court even added a piece at footnote 6 finding Judicial Watch satisfied associational standing, which Indiana did not even argue.

• The standard NVRA Seciton 8 notice issued by Judicial Watch and TTV was found to satisfy the statute (bad news for other non-compliant notice recipients).  True the Vote was found to be a proper party/

• The Secretary of State of Indiana is not dismissed and continues to be a party to this action (pp. 9-10).

• The NVRA records requirement at page 6 – “With regard to the Records Claim, the Defendants do not—and cannot—assert that the Plaintiffs lack standing. See, e.g., Federal Election Comm’n v. Akins, 524 U.S. 11, 24-25 (finding standing to bring suit to redress an “informational injury . . . directly related to voting, the most basic of political rights…”

• “The Defendants also argue that the Letter fails to provide sufficient details about any alleged violation of the NVRA to satisfy the notice requirement. It is not surprising that the Letter does not contain any detailed allegations, inasmuch as the NVRA provision at issue does not contain any detailed requirements; it simply requires “reasonable effort” on the part of the State. The Letter sets forth the reasons for Judicial Watch’s conclusion that the Defendants have failed to comply with that general requirement. The Court believes that was sufficient to satisfy the notice requirement of the NVRA with regard to Judicial Watch’s claims.”

A good ruling for election integrity.  I expect this will sharpen the case against non-compliant states and counties.