Jia Lissa
A law firm with established ties to Elon Musk’s America PAC has founded a new, nationwide "election integrity" organization, drawing immediate scrutiny for its alignment with former President Donald Trump’s unsubstantiated claims of widespread election fraud. This new entity, a nonprofit called the Association of State and Local Election Officials (ASLEO), emerges as a significant player in the ongoing partisan struggle over election administration, promising to promote policies that critics argue could restrict voter access and undermine democratic processes.
The Genesis of ASLEO: A Timeline of Formation and Key Players
The formation of ASLEO was spearheaded by a lawyer then affiliated with Lex Politica, the law firm co-founded by Chris Gober. Gober, a prominent figure in Republican political circles, served as chief counsel for Musk’s America PAC in 2024 and is currently campaigning for a seat in the House of Representatives in Texas. Lex Politica’s deep entanglement with Musk’s political endeavors and its expansion following Gober’s involvement with America PAC underscores the strategic nature of ASLEO’s establishment.
The nonprofit was officially registered in Texas on June 17 by Michael Garcar, who was then an attorney at Lex Politica. Just over a month later, on July 20, the Internal Revenue Service granted ASLEO tax-exempt status. The organization listed a Washington, D.C., address – a UPS Store box on Pennsylvania Avenue – which coincidentally is the same address Lex Politica uses, as evidenced by a U.S. Supreme Court filing from one of its attorneys, Erin Hawley, wife of Senator Josh Hawley. This detail, initially unearthed by the Democratic-linked research group True North Research, highlights the close operational ties between the law firm and the nascent election organization. Garcar has since transitioned to Five Rings Law Group, a firm comprising Lex Politica alumni, including Jenny Kim, a former Koch Industries lawyer who previously worked for Gober. Despite inquiries, Garcar, Kim, and Gober have not responded to questions regarding Lex Politica’s connections to ASLEO.
Deep Dive into Leadership: Architecting "Election Integrity"
The board of directors for ASLEO features a roster of individuals known for their involvement in election-related activism and Republican politics, many of whom have either expressed or supported skepticism regarding the integrity of recent elections. This composition raises questions about the organization’s stated mission and its potential impact on election administration across the country.
Florida’s Blueprint: Byrd and DeSantis’s Endorsement
Florida Secretary of State Cord Byrd publicly announced his involvement with ASLEO alongside Florida Governor Ron DeSantis at a press conference on September 24. During this event, both officials championed ASLEO’s mission, which aims to propagate what they term "election integrity" policies nationwide, using Florida’s stringent voting and election rules as a "blueprint." Byrd, who announced the group would commence operations post-election, articulated ASLEO’s intent to "have state chapters to support, educate, and train local and state election officials on election integrity, because that’s something that the other side has been very good at." He further criticized existing training mechanisms, stating, "They’re the ones going in and certifying and training people who run our elections, and not doing it in a way that we think comports with the law and voter trust."
Under Byrd and DeSantis’s leadership, Florida has implemented a series of electoral reforms that have drawn criticism from voting rights advocates. These measures include a state version of the federal SAVE Act, which mandates proof of citizenship at polling locations, and a prohibition on the use of student IDs for voting, set to take effect in 2027. Byrd expressed enthusiasm for exporting these policies, declaring, "I’m very excited to head up that initiative and take what we’ve done in Florida as the blueprint, as the model for the nation, take it nationwide." The offices of Byrd and DeSantis have not responded to requests for comment regarding their involvement with ASLEO.
The Influence of Cleta Mitchell’s Network
A significant presence on ASLEO’s board is Sharon Bemis, president of Cleta Mitchell’s Election Integrity Network (EIN). The EIN is widely recognized as the country’s most prominent election denial organization, closely aligned with the Trump administration’s narrative of election fraud. Mitchell herself is a veteran conservative lawyer who played a key role in efforts to overturn the 2020 election results, including participating in the infamous phone call where Trump pressured Georgia election officials to "find" votes. Bemis’s leadership role on ASLEO’s board strongly signals the organization’s ideological leanings and its potential operational strategies, which often involve grassroots efforts to challenge election procedures and outcomes.
Georgia’s Controversial Figures: Adams and Johnston
Further reinforcing the group’s direction are Julie Adams and Janice Johnston, both with contentious histories in Georgia’s election landscape. Julie Adams, an avowed election denier, serves both as a member of the Fulton County Board of Elections in Georgia and as a regional coordinator for the Election Integrity Network. Adams has been a vocal proponent of Trump’s conspiracy theories concerning widespread election fraud, repeatedly filing lawsuits—often with the assistance of the Republican National Committee—to gain access to voting records. Her stance has led her to refuse to certify election results without being permitted to inspect these records, a move that has caused significant disruption and legal battles.
Janice Johnston, who recently departed Georgia’s MAGA-dominated State Election Board, also brings a history of controversy to ASLEO. Her tenure on the Georgia board was characterized by intense partisanship, legal disputes rooted in false fraud claims, and a series of actions aimed at tightening election controls. Under her guidance, the board pursued investigations into Fulton County based on specious allegations, championed mass voter purges supported by election denial activists, and actively sought to eliminate voting machines. Adams and Johnston have consistently targeted Fulton County with fraud allegations. Their celebration of an FBI raid on an elections warehouse in Fulton County in January—which seized tens of thousands of ballots from the 2020 election—underscores their commitment to these narratives. Johnston was an unnamed witness in the FBI affidavit that precipitated the raid, providing information about alleged double-counted ballots, despite these claims having been previously investigated and disproven as having any impact on the 2020 election outcome. Her identification came from the affidavit’s description of a "Republican-appointed member" of the State Election Board who was "an obstetrician." During the raid, Johnston notably went live on Steve Bannon’s War Room podcast from a nearby SUV.
Michigan State Representative Ann Bollin, who has coordinated with the Election Integrity Network, also sits on ASLEO’s board. While Johnston and Bollin have previously denied being "election deniers," their affiliations and past actions suggest a clear alignment with the movement. The organization’s Texas registration provides no details on its work, and it currently lacks a public web presence, making its immediate activities opaque. Sara Tindall Ghazal, the sole Democrat on the Georgia State Election Board and Johnston’s former colleague, responded to news of Johnston’s involvement with a pointed, "lol. I mean this quite seriously, ‘lol.’ That’s my comment."
Elon Musk’s Expanding Political Footprint
While ASLEO’s direct operational link to Elon Musk remains unclear, the organization’s foundation by a Musk-linked law firm, coupled with the tech mogul’s escalating political engagement, draws a clear line of connection. Musk, a prolific entrepreneur and public figure, has significantly increased his financial and rhetorical support for Republican causes and candidates, making him an unprecedented force in current U.S. politics.
Financial Clout: Musk’s Unprecedented Spending
Musk’s financial involvement in recent election cycles has been nothing short of extensive. His America PAC has been a primary financier of a sprawling canvassing operation designed to boost Republican voter turnout. He stands as the single largest donor to Republican candidates this election cycle, having poured over $445 million into various campaigns. A staggering $276 million of this sum has been spent since July alone, nearing his total contributions during the entire 2024 presidential election cycle. This substantial financial backing is strategically directed, particularly targeting Senate races crucial for maintaining a Republican majority. For Musk, these elections carry significant weight; a Democratic sweep of the House and Senate could potentially subject him and his companies to congressional investigations, adding a layer of personal and corporate interest to his political spending.
Ideological Alignment: From "Great Replacement" to Election Misinformation
Beyond financial contributions, Musk has consistently propagated narratives and theories that align with the "election integrity" movement and Trump’s false claims of election fraud. For years, Musk has championed the racist "great replacement theory," which posits a systematic demographic shift where minorities are replacing white populations in Western countries. This theory often serves as a foundational ideological underpinning for election denialism, particularly by suggesting that widespread voting by undocumented immigrants is eroding the traditional electorate.
Musk has amplified election conspiracies, doubling down on such claims this year. He has emerged as a major disseminator of election misinformation, notably boosting a false story about Texas U.S. Senate candidate James Talarico being committed to a psychiatric facility. Furthermore, his America PAC has been implicated in spreading inaccurate information concerning mail-in ballots, a recurring target of "election integrity" activists. While Musk has recently taken a step back from frequent public commentary on U.S. politics, his underlying beliefs continue to surface. In a recent exchange on X (formerly Twitter) with Senator Mike Lee, Musk echoed the sentiment that Democrats benefit from and therefore promote "noncitizen voting," stating, "Democrats, which is why they push for open borders and noncitizen voting! Incentives explain behavior." This public stance directly mirrors the concerns often raised by those advocating for stricter "election integrity" measures.
The "Election Integrity" Movement: A Broader Context
The "election integrity" movement, as framed by ASLEO and its allies, is not new, but it gained unprecedented momentum and a more defined partisan edge following the 2020 presidential election. Fueled by former President Trump’s baseless allegations of a stolen election, this movement has evolved from a focus on general electoral security to a concerted effort to reshape voting laws and election administration in ways that critics contend are designed to suppress turnout, particularly among Democratic-leaning demographics.
Historical Roots and Post-2020 Intensification
Concerns about election integrity have historically been bipartisan, with both major parties advocating for measures to prevent fraud and ensure fair elections. However, after 2020, the term "election integrity" became heavily associated with claims of widespread fraud that have been repeatedly debunked by election officials, courts, and independent audits. Groups like Cleta Mitchell’s Election Integrity Network have since worked tirelessly to recruit and train activists, embedding them in local election processes to challenge voter rolls, scrutinize ballot counting, and advocate for more restrictive voting laws. The movement’s tactics often involve questioning established procedures, demanding granular access to election data, and propagating narratives that erode public trust in electoral outcomes, particularly when results do not favor their preferred candidates.
Policy Implications: Voter Access vs. Fraud Prevention
The policies championed by the "election integrity" movement, such as stricter voter ID laws, limitations on mail-in voting, aggressive voter roll purges, and increased poll watcher powers, are framed by proponents as necessary safeguards against fraud. However, voting rights advocates argue that these measures disproportionately impact minority voters, students, the elderly, and low-income individuals, effectively creating barriers to ballot access. The emphasis on using Florida’s laws as a national "blueprint" is particularly concerning for these advocates, given the state’s recent history of implementing some of the nation’s most restrictive voting rules, including the creation of an "election crimes" police force. The debate often centers on balancing the legitimate need for secure elections with the fundamental right to vote, with critics asserting that the "election integrity" movement prioritizes unproven fraud prevention over voter enfranchisement.
Potential Implications and Future Outlook
The establishment of the Association of State and Local Election Officials represents a significant, well-resourced, and strategically positioned effort to influence election administration across the United States. Its ties to Elon Musk’s extensive political funding and prominent figures associated with election denialism suggest a concerted campaign to enact policies that could fundamentally alter the American electoral landscape.
Nationwide Ramifications for Election Administration
ASLEO’s stated goal of creating state chapters and training election officials based on Florida’s model implies a nationwide push for standardized, more restrictive voting laws. This could lead to a fragmented electoral system where access to the ballot varies significantly by state, potentially creating confusion and exacerbating partisan divisions. The prospect of an organization aligned with false fraud claims actively "educating" and "training" local election officials raises serious concerns about the politicization of what should be a neutral administrative function. Such efforts could undermine the independence of election administrators and further erode public confidence in election outcomes, especially if the training promotes skepticism towards established electoral practices.
Scrutiny and the Future of Voting Rights
The formation of ASLEO will undoubtedly draw intense scrutiny from voting rights organizations, civil liberties groups, and Democratic political entities. Legal challenges to its activities and the policies it advocates are highly probable, particularly as states consider implementing its proposed "blueprint." The role of dark money, channeled through tax-exempt nonprofits like ASLEO, will also be a focal point of investigation, as it allows for significant political influence with limited transparency regarding donors. The broader impact on voting rights could be substantial, potentially leading to reduced voter registration, increased voter purges, and a more challenging environment for citizens to cast their ballots. As the nation approaches future election cycles, the operations of ASLEO will be a critical development to watch, as it embodies a potent combination of significant financial backing, strategic legal expertise, and an ideological commitment to a particular vision of "election integrity" that has profound implications for the future of American democracy.
