Rockland County Election Lawsuit, Everything You Need to Know About the 2024 Election Challenge
The Rockland County Election Lawsuit represents a significant legal challenge to the 2024 general election results, with plaintiffs seeking a full hand recount of presidential and Senate ballots. Filed by SMART Legislation and other parties, this case has advanced through New York State Supreme Court with Judge Rachel Tanguay ordering discovery to proceed.
A recent court ruling has allowed this election challenge to move forward, making it one of the most closely watched post-2024 election legal proceedings in New York State.
What Is the Rockland County Election Lawsuit?
The lawsuit, officially filed in December 2024, challenges the accuracy of Rockland County’s 2024 general election results for both the presidential and U.S. Senate races. The case centers on alleged voting irregularities and statistical anomalies that plaintiffs claim warrant judicial intervention.
For those unfamiliar with the legal process, understanding what kind of lawyer do you need to sue can be crucial when considering election-related legal challenges like this one.
Table of Contents
Key Parties Involved
Plaintiffs:
- SMART Legislation (action arm of SMART Elections)
- Diane Sare (U.S. Senate candidate under the LaRouche Party, Sloatsburg resident)
- Two Rockland County voters
Defendant:
- Rockland County Board of Elections
Court: New York State Supreme Court, Rockland County Presiding Judge: Hon. Rachel Tanguay
Core Legal Claims and Evidence
Primary Allegations
The lawsuit makes several specific claims about irregularities in Rockland County’s 2024 election:
Vote Recording Discrepancies Plaintiffs allege that more voters submitted signed affidavits claiming they voted for Senate candidate Diane Sare than the number of votes officially recorded for her by the Board of Elections.
Statistical Anomalies The complaint highlights unusual voting patterns, including:
- Multiple precincts where Kamala Harris received zero votes while Kirsten Gillibrand won decisively
- Drop-off rates between Trump and Harris differing by more than 30%
- Results deemed “statistically highly unlikely” in four of five Rockland County towns
Expert Analysis Dr. Max Bonamente, a professor of physics and astronomy at the University of Alabama, analyzed the data and stated that the results “would require extreme sociological or political causes for their explanation.”
Technical Voting System Details
ES&S Voting Equipment Used
Rockland County utilized Election Systems & Software (ES&S) voting machines during the 2024 election. The lawsuit’s discovery requests specifically seek information about the “trusted build software” currently running on these machines to enable comparison with certified versions.
2024 Software Updates Controversy
Between March and September 2024, ES&S voting machines nationwide received multiple hardware and software updates that were approved under “de minimis” classifications. One significant update (ECO-1188) affected circumstances under which error messages are generated about voting machine software.
Research published by SMART Elections revealed that the ES&S software verification process was updated twice in 2024, raising questions about the consistency of vote tabulation systems used during the election.
Financial and Resource Implications
Legal Costs and Funding
The lawsuit represents a significant financial undertaking for both plaintiffs and defendants. SMART Elections, as a nonprofit organization, relies on donations and grants to fund their legal challenges. The cost of expert statistical analysis, legal representation, and discovery proceedings can easily reach six figures.
Potential County Costs
If ordered, a full hand recount of presidential and Senate ballots in Rockland County could cost taxpayers substantial amounts, including:
- Personnel costs for recount teams
- Security and facility expenses
- Administrative overhead
- Potential litigation costs if appeals follow
Political and Social Context
Broader Election Integrity Movement
This case represents a significant development within the broader election integrity movement. Unlike many post-2024 election challenges that originated from conservative groups, this lawsuit comes from nonpartisan election security advocates, giving it unique positioning in the national conversation about voting systems.
Impact on Election Skepticism
According to Votebeat analysis, the Rockland County case has contributed to election skepticism across political lines, with some progressive groups now questioning 2024 election results. This represents a notable shift in post-election litigation patterns.
Community Response
The lawsuit has generated mixed reactions within Rockland County’s diverse communities:
Supportive Voices: Some residents appreciate the transparency efforts and statistical scrutiny Skeptical Response: Others view the challenge as unnecessary disruption of validated results Jewish Community Considerations: Given that voting patterns in Orthodox communities are central to the case, community leaders have emphasized the legitimate nature of bloc voting traditions
Historical Election Context in Rockland County
Previous Election Patterns
Rockland County has historically shown complex voting patterns due to its diverse demographic composition, including:
Orthodox Jewish Communities: Concentrated primarily in Ramapo and surrounding areas, these communities traditionally vote as cohesive blocs following rabbinical guidance General Population: More varied voting patterns typical of suburban New York counties Historical Turnout: Rockland County typically shows high voter participation rates compared to state averages
Comparison to 2020 Results
The statistical analysis cited in the lawsuit suggests significant deviations from 2020 voting patterns in four of Rockland County’s five towns, which forms part of the legal argument for irregularities requiring investigation.
Recent Court Ruling Details
Judge Tanguay’s March 2025 Decision
In March 2025, Judge Rachel Tanguay issued a crucial ruling ordering discovery to proceed in the case. The court specifically directed examination of:
- Presidential ballot recounts
- Senate ballot verification processes
- Voting machine details and operations
- Documentation related to vote tabulation
May 2025 Open Court Proceedings
Judge Tanguay ruled in open court that the allegations warranted continued legal proceedings, allowing the lawsuit to advance toward potential resolution.
The Statistical Evidence Debate
Contested Voting Patterns
The lawsuit points to several precincts with unusual voting patterns:
Ramapo 35: Trump received 552 votes, Harris received 0 votes, while Gillibrand received 331 votes Ramapo 55: Harris received only 2 votes while Gillibrand received 909 votes
Expert Counterarguments
Election data expert Benjamin Rosenblatt offers a different interpretation, explaining that Rockland County’s Hasidic and Orthodox Jewish communities traditionally vote as a bloc following rabbinical guidance. This voting pattern could explain the apparent anomalies without suggesting impropriety.
Legal Context and Implications
Scope of Potential Impact
Unlike some post-2024 election lawsuits, legal experts note that this case:
- Will NOT invalidate or overturn the 2024 Senate or Presidential election
- Will NOT force a special election
- Will NOT result in a court-appointed election monitor
The lawsuit’s scope remains limited to Rockland County’s vote accuracy verification.
Precedential Considerations
This case represents one of the few post-2024 election challenges that has survived initial court scrutiny and advanced to discovery phase, making it legally significant for future election disputes.
Current Status and Next Steps
Discovery Phase Progress
As of summer 2025, the lawsuit has entered the discovery phase, with plaintiffs requesting:
- Detailed voting machine information
- Ballot examination procedures
- Complete documentation of vote tabulation processes
Potential Hand Recount
The plaintiffs continue to seek a “full public, transparent hand recount” of all presidential and Senate ballots in Rockland County, which could provide definitive resolution to the disputed vote counts.
Frequently Asked Questions
What sparked this lawsuit?
The lawsuit was triggered by statistical anomalies in voting patterns, including precincts where Harris received zero votes while Gillibrand won decisively, combined with voter affidavits claiming more people voted for Diane Sare than officially recorded.
Who is behind the legal challenge?
SMART Legislation, the action arm of SMART Elections (a nonpartisan election watchdog group), serves as the lead plaintiff alongside Senate candidate Diane Sare and two Rockland County voters.
What does the county say about these claims?
A Rockland County spokesperson stated: “We have full faith the BOE conducted a free & fair election & that every vote was counted correctly.”
Could this affect other election results?
No. Legal experts emphasize this case is limited to Rockland County and cannot impact broader state or national election outcomes.
What happens if irregularities are proven?
Even if irregularities are substantiated, the remedy would likely be limited to correcting Rockland County’s vote totals rather than overturning any elections.
When will the case be resolved?
The timeline remains uncertain as the case progresses through discovery, but resolution could occur within months depending on court scheduling and evidence complexity.
How much will this lawsuit cost?
Legal experts estimate the total costs for all parties could reach several hundred thousand dollars. For Rockland County taxpayers, a potential hand recount could cost $50,000-$200,000, while legal defense costs add additional expenses.
What voting machines were used in Rockland County?
The county used Election Systems & Software (ES&S) voting machines, which received multiple software updates between March and September 2024. The discovery process specifically seeks information about these software changes and their potential impact on vote tabulation.
How does this compare to other 2024 election challenges?
Unlike many post-2024 election lawsuits that were quickly dismissed, this case advanced past preliminary motions, suggesting courts found sufficient legal merit. It’s also notable for originating from nonpartisan election security advocates rather than partisan sources.
What happens to the software updates discovered?
The lawsuit revealed that ES&S voting systems received “de minimis” updates in 2024, including changes to error message generation. The legal implications of these undisclosed updates remain part of the ongoing discovery process.
Expert Legal Analysis
Strength of Claims
Legal observers note that the case’s advancement past preliminary challenges suggests the court found merit in examining the statistical evidence, even if ultimate success remains uncertain. Similar to other complex legal proceedings, choosing the right legal representation is crucial – our guide on questions to ask a lawyer when starting a business offers valuable insights that apply to any major legal matter.
Burden of Proof
Plaintiffs must demonstrate not just statistical anomalies, but actual errors in vote counting or tabulation that materially affected results. This burden is similar to proving damages in other types of litigation, as outlined in our analysis of property tax appeal lawyer fees.
Potential Outcomes
Possible resolutions include:
- Court-ordered hand recount revealing counting errors
- Judicial determination that anomalies reflect legitimate voting patterns
- Settlement agreement on improved election procedures
What This Means for Voters
Election Integrity Implications
Regardless of outcome, this case highlights ongoing concerns about election accuracy and the importance of transparent vote verification processes. Citizens interested in civic engagement and legal rights should understand the importance of business law in maintaining institutional accountability.
Future Election Procedures
The case may influence how Rockland County and other jurisdictions handle post-election audits and address statistical anomalies in future elections. Legal precedents established here could affect election administration nationwide.
Public Confidence
Resolution of these claims, whether through validation of results or correction of errors, serves the crucial function of maintaining public trust in electoral processes. For those seeking to understand legal proceedings better, reviewing our temporary restraining order lawyer guide can provide context on how courts handle urgent legal matters.
Key Takeaways
The Rockland County Election Lawsuit represents a significant test of how courts balance statistical evidence against established election procedures. While the case cannot change broader election outcomes, it provides important precedent for addressing post-election disputes based on data analysis.
For those following this case, the discovery phase will likely prove decisive in determining whether alleged anomalies reflect genuine counting errors or legitimate voting patterns within Rockland County’s diverse communities.
As proceedings continue, this lawsuit serves as a crucial example of how election disputes can be addressed through legal channels while maintaining the integrity of democratic processes.
This article reflects the most current information available as of August 2025. Legal proceedings remain ongoing, and developments should be monitored through official court filings and verified news sources. For additional legal resources and insights, visit our comprehensive guides on consumer protection attorney identity theft cases and other legal matters at AllAboutLawyer.com.
Related Legal Topics:
About the Author
Sarah Klein, JD, is a licensed attorney and legal content strategist with over 12 years of experience across civil, criminal, family, and regulatory law. At All About Lawyer, she covers a wide range of legal topics — from high-profile lawsuits and courtroom stories to state traffic laws and everyday legal questions — all with a focus on accuracy, clarity, and public understanding.
Her writing blends real legal insight with plain-English explanations, helping readers stay informed and legally aware.
Read more about Sarah