Public Interest Legal Foundation

The foundation originally flagged jurisdictions with more registered voters than resident adults, according to annual U.S. Census population estimates at the time.

al..[12][13] The organization's current president and general counsel is J. Christian Adams,[7] an American attorney and conservative activist[14] formerly employed by the United States Department of Justice under the George W. Bush administration.

[16] In 2017 Adams was chosen by President Donald Trump to be a member of his Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity.

[15] Director Hans von Spakovsky is an American attorney and a former member of the Federal Election Commission (FEC).

The suit was dropped in July 2020 after actions by Detroit Clerk Janice Winfrey and Elections Director George Azzouz to review and remove likely deceased registrants on a list provided by the plaintiff.

"[25] In February 2020, PILF sued Maine Secretary of State Matt Dunlap for alleged violation of the Public Disclosure Provision of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

"The ACLU's attorneys argue that the foundation's lawsuit does not account for thousands of names that were removed as part of a routine cleanup of the rolls in January.

[29] In August 2020, PILF filed a lawsuit against Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson for failing to act on a request to disclose voting records related to the 2018 general election from the city of Southfield.

"The Maricopa County voters’ complaint is centered around the fact that they were forced to use Sharpie brand-type markers to complete their ballots.

[31] The lawsuit was dropped immediately after the election, after Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich indicated an investigation found there was nothing to the claims.

"[32] In February 2024, a federal judge in North Dakota dismissed a lawsuit backed by the Public Interest Legal Foundation that challenged the state's acceptance of mail-in ballots after Election Day.

The court ruled Splonskowski lacked standing, failed to show he was harmed by the law or that constitutional rights were being violated and that if successful the lawsuit would impact overseas and military voters.