Rockland County Election Lawsuit, Judge Set To Rule On Dismissal After Board's Motion

The Rockland County Board of Elections filed a motion to dismiss the 2024 election lawsuit, and plaintiffs submitted their response on August 29, 2025. The judge now has 60 days after the Board’s reply to rule on the dismissal motion. This procedural development marks a critical juncture in a case that has attracted national attention since December 2024.

The scheduled September 22 court date was cancelled in July, shifting the focus to written arguments rather than courtroom proceedings.

What Is the Rockland County Election Lawsuit About?

SMART Legislation filed the lawsuit in December 2024 seeking a full hand recount of presidential and Senate ballots in Rockland County. The case centers on alleged discrepancies in how votes were counted during the 2024 general election.

Originally, three individuals—including LaRouche party Senate candidate Diane Sare and two voters—joined SMART Legislation as plaintiffs. By March, the individual plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed their claims, leaving only SMART Legislation in the case.

Key Allegations in the Lawsuit

Miscount of Senate Votes: Nine voters signed sworn affidavits stating they cast ballots for Diane Sare in one district, but the Board of Elections recorded only five votes—a nearly 50% shortfall. In another district, five voters swore they voted for Sare while only three votes were recorded.

Zero-Vote Districts: Multiple districts showed hundreds of votes for Democratic Senator Kirsten Gillibrand but zero votes for Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris.

Statistical Anomalies: A statistician determined the 2024 presidential results were statistically highly unlikely in four of five Rockland County towns when compared with 2020 results. Max Bonamente, Ph.D., Professor at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, stated these data “would require extreme sociological or political causes for their explanation, and would benefit from further assurances as to their fidelity”.

What the Court Has Ruled So Far

On March 3, 2025, the Court dismissed claims to invalidate the 2024 election results, hold a new special election, and appoint a monitor on its own initiative. However, Judge Tanguay ruled that “the branch [of the plaintiff’s petition] directing a recount of the Presidential and Senate ballots in Rockland County” remains on the table.

In May 2025, Judge Rachel Tanguay of the New York Supreme Court ruled that discovery must proceed, stating “my rules say that discovery continues and advances”. This decision came after the Board of Elections acknowledged it might amend its response based on discovery findings.

The County Board of Elections chose not to seek outright dismissal of the complaint initially but instead answered denying the allegations while acknowledging some discovery may be warranted.

Rockland County Election Lawsuit, Judge Set to Rule on Dismissal After Board's Motion

Discovery Process and Document Requests

On June 26, 2025, SMART Legislation submitted 15 pages of document requests and questions to the Rockland County Board of Elections. The requests include:

Voting machine information and software updates
Voter rolls and registration data
Hardware specifications, including forensic copies of hard drives
Equipment diagrams covering network and Wi-Fi components
Flash drives carrying election results
Security protocols for password creation and chain of custody
Lists of election workers
Financial interactions and vendor contracts
Communications with voting machine manufacturers Elections Systems & Software (ES&S) and testing lab Pro V&V

SMART Legislation asked about modem, Wi-Fi or cellular connections to election systems and whether Rockland County ever used Starlink satellites’ Direct to Cell service or BallotProof software.

The Board of Elections has provided some requested discovery items, though plaintiffs intend to ask the judge to ensure they supply the remaining documents (excluding certain 2020 documents both parties agreed not to pursue).

Expert Analysis: Are the Claims Valid?

MIT professor and election expert Charles Stewart III carefully analyzed the precinct-level data and found no signs of errors or manipulation. He noted the anomalies center on polling locations in Ramapo where Orthodox Jewish communities supported Gillibrand but not Harris, explaining the vote gap. Stewart concluded: “The Rockland County election results in this case are a nothingburger”.

Local analysts point to “bloc” voting patterns in Hasidic communities in Ramapo districts, where voters showed overwhelming support for favored candidates regardless of party affiliation. In some districts, Harris scored single-digit votes while Gillibrand won substantially.

However, local Rockland County reporting indicates Hasidic communities don’t always vote as one monolithic bloc, with thousands of voters showing “varying degrees of fidelity to the political endorsements of community leaders”.

County Attorney Thomas Humbach stated: “We believe that this claim has no merit, and that the petitioners do not qualify for a recount as a matter of law”.

What Could Happen Next?

After the Rockland County Board of Elections submits their reply to the plaintiffs’ response, Judge Tanguay has 60 days to rule on the motion to dismiss. She could:

Dismiss the case entirely
Allow the case to proceed to trial
Request additional information from either party
Order a limited or full hand recount

Legal analysts note the Court may at best order a recount of Senate and Presidential elections in Rockland County, but will not invalidate results, force a special election, or appoint a monitor.

Will This Change the 2024 Election Results?

Regardless of the lawsuit’s outcome, it won’t change the results of the 2024 presidential election, which Congress has already certified. The litigation will either uncover irregularities at the Rockland County Board of Elections or demonstrate the anomaly can be explained by bloc voting patterns.

Timeline of Major Case Events

December 2024: SMART Legislation, Diane Sare, and two voters file lawsuit
March 3, 2025: Court dismisses invalidation, special election, and monitor requests
March 2025: Individual plaintiffs voluntarily dismiss their claims
May 22, 2025: Judge Tanguay rules discovery must proceed
June 26, 2025: Plaintiffs submit 15 pages of document requests
July 2025: September 22 court date cancelled
August 29, 2025: Plaintiffs submit response to motion to dismiss
Pending: Board of Elections reply to response
Pending: Judge’s ruling on dismissal motion (60 days after Board’s reply)

Frequently Asked Questions

Can this lawsuit overturn the 2024 election?
No. The litigation will not invalidate or overturn the 2024 Senate or Presidential election, force a special election, or result in a court-appointed election monitor. Congress has certified the results.

Who is SMART Legislation?
SMART Legislation is the action arm of SMART Elections, a nonpartisan nonprofit organization dedicated to ensuring fair and accurate elections.

What court is handling this case?
The case is proceeding in New York Supreme Court in Rockland County, with Justice Rachel Tanguay presiding.

What are the main voting irregularities alleged?
The lawsuit cites sworn voter affidavits contradicting official counts for Senate candidate Diane Sare, districts where hundreds voted for Gillibrand but zero for Harris, and statistical anomalies in presidential vote totals.

How have election experts responded?
MIT professor Charles Stewart III analyzed the data and found no signs of errors or manipulation, attributing the patterns to Orthodox Jewish voting blocs in Ramapo.

When will the judge rule on the dismissal motion?
The judge has 60 days after the Rockland County Board of Elections files their reply to the plaintiffs’ August 29 response.

Could there be a hand recount?
Yes. Judge Tanguay ruled the request for a recount of Presidential and Senate ballots “remains on the table”, though she could still dismiss the case.

Disclaimer: This information is for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For specific legal guidance regarding election law matters, consult with a qualified attorney licensed in your jurisdiction.

Related Articles:

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