§11-25 Challenge by voters; grounds; procedure. (a) Any registered voter may challenge the right of a person to be or to remain registered as a voter for any cause not previously decided by the board of registration or the supreme court in respect to the same person. The challenge shall be in writing, setting forth the grounds upon which it is based, and be signed by the person making the challenge. The challenge shall be delivered to the clerk who shall immediately serve notice thereof on the person challenged. The clerk shall, as soon as possible, investigate and rule on the challenge.
(b) Any voter rightfully in a voter service center may challenge the right to vote of any person who comes to the voter service center for voting purposes. The challenge shall be on the grounds that the voter is not the person the voter alleges to be, or that the voter is not entitled to vote. No other or further challenge shall be allowed. Any person challenged pursuant to this subsection shall first be given the opportunity to make the relevant correction pursuant to section 11-21. The challenge shall be considered and decided immediately by the clerk, and the ruling shall be announced.
(c) If neither the challenger nor the challenged voter appeals the ruling of the clerk, then the voter shall either be allowed to vote or be prevented from voting in accordance with the ruling. If an appeal is taken to the board of registration, the challenged voter shall be allowed to vote; provided that the ballot is placed in a sealed envelope to be later counted or rejected in accordance with the ruling on appeal. The chief election officer shall adopt rules in accordance with chapter 91 to safeguard the secrecy of the challenged voter's ballot. [L 1970, c 26, pt of §2; am L 1973, c 217, §1(m); am L 1979, c 139, §4 and c 196, §5; am L 1980, c 137, §1; am L 1985, c 203, §3; am L 2014, c 166, §2; am L 2019, c 136, §10]
Case Notes
Where county board of registration only ruled on the individual's right to be or remain a registered voter, which was within the scope of its jurisdiction, and did not mention any possible consequences for the individual's candidacy under the provision applicable to a candidate whose nomination papers have been successfully challenged, board did not exceed its jurisdiction in finding that individual was a candidate for the council seat, an undisputed fact that provided background and context for the appeal, and entering conclusions of law containing extraneous information on the county charter and the residency requirement for running for a council seat. 121 H. 297, 219 P.3d 1084 (2009).
Where county clerk acted within the scope of clerk's authority in construing plaintiff's complaint letters as a challenge to individual's residency under this section, and investigating on that basis, the county board of registration therefore did not err in denying individual's motion to dismiss, and had jurisdiction to hear plaintiff's appeal from that aspect of clerk's decision. 121 H. 297, 219 P.3d 1084 (2009).
Discussed: 133 H. 229 (App.), 325 P.3d 641 (2014).