Unite4Freedom

FORMAL NOTICES FILED WITH SIX STATES DETAIL OVER 10.7 MILLION SUSPECTED VIOLATION OF FEDERAL LAW

Unite4Freedom (U4F), a national election integrity organization working on behalf of all Americans, together with aggrieved citizens, filed a Notice of Violations and Demand for Corrective Action concerning the fulfillment of legal requirements under the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) in six states. The notices—filed in California, Colorado, Illinois, New York, Pennsylvania and Texas—are based on U4F’s analysis of each state’s official election records totaling 10,782,283 apparent violations of federal election law under NVRA, demonstrating a consistent and continuing pattern of abuse.

FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS AT ISSUE
Congress enacted NVRA to establish uniform national standards governing voter-registration administration, voter-list maintenance, and public inspection of records for them. Under federal law 52 USC § 20507(i), these records are supposed to be available for public inspection, and federal law has clarified that these records must be auditable, yet the states continue to obfuscate their records and hide the apparent non-compliance.

Section 20510(b) of NVRA authorizes an aggrieved person to provide written notice of violations to the chief state election official and affords the state an opportunity to investigate, correct, explain, or otherwise resolve those violations before civil litigation is initiated. A non-profit organization acting for the benefit of the American people, such as U4F, qualifies as a federally-defined aggrieved person. Under the law, the state has 20 days to investigate, prove the data is ok, or correct it.

If the errors are not corrected and procedures are not put in place to prevent a recurrence in 2026, U4F will seek to force the states to change their systems under the personal cause of action enshrined in NVRA. U4F will also continue supporting DOJ and the Administration’s efforts to clean up our broken election system nationwide.

ALLEGED VIOLATIONS AND FACTUAL BASIS OF NOTICES
A. Failure to conduct a reasonable and uniform list-maintenance program [52 USC § 20507(a)(4)], as evidenced by U4F’s 2024 Election Validity Scorecards identifying the following record conditions:
• duplicate or conflicting voter-registrations;
• unexplained changes in voter registration status;
• registrations containing internally inconsistent or illogical data;
• apparent irregular registration changes;
• registration conditions requiring documented explanation under established list-maintenance procedures; and other record level conditions.

The number of unique votes impacted in the 2024 General Election was:
• 5,588,594 in California
• 51,903 in Colorado
• 1,045,659 in Illinois
• 895,595 in New York
• 1,527,639 in Pennsylvania
• 1,672,893 in Texas
In total, there were 10,872,283 suspected voting violations across the six states.

B. Failure to maintain and make available records concerning list-maintenance programs [52 USC § 20507(i)] to determine:
• the basis for recorded changes;
• the authority under which those changes occurred;
• the implementation of voter-list maintenance procedures;
• the preservation of required records; and
• the completeness of the state’s public-inspection obligations under NVRA.

C. Failure to preserve and document record-level changes relevant to list-maintenance activities, as evidenced by U4F’s Vote Tampering Reports.

i. The analyses for California, Colorado, Illinois, New York and Pennsylvania identify numerous post certification changes to voter-history and voter-registration records occurring across successive, official, statewide, voter-file snapshots. These comparisons reveal the following number of total changes to participation history of 2024 certified election records without documentation to substantiate those revisions:
• 254,203 total changes across two comparisons in California
• 3,416 total changes across one comparison in Colorado
• 254,027 total changes to across one comparison in Illinois
• 682,515 total changes across five comparisons in New York
• 2,039,593 total changes across two comparisons in Pennsylvania

ii. In Texas’s 2024 election, the analysis summarized the existence of documented voter-record changes across successive official datasets during early voting:
2,735,883 total changes to voter participation records during early voting

Both U4F’s Election Validity Scorecards and Vote Tampering Reports expose the total number of potential violations of federal election law in each state. U4F has also provided the datasets containing all the alleged violations with each notice. U4F is not claiming that every documented concern establishes a violation of federal law, but rather that they require investigation, explanation, and documentation sufficient to determine whether the states have adhered to the requirements enacted by Congress.

RELIEF REQUESTED
According to 52 USC § 20510(b), U4F and the additional complainants respectfully request that the states:
• Investigate each documented record-level condition identified in the U4F Reports.
• Produce, or make available for inspection, all records concerning the implementation of their state’s voter-list maintenance programs that are required to be maintained.
• Provide a written explanation describing the procedures, policies, and implementation practices responsible for the documented record-level conditions identified.
• Preserve all records relevant to the potential violations until the issues presented have been resolved.
• Provide a written response addressing each violation identified.
U4F is dedicated to a non-partisan restoration of lawful, accurate, and transparent elections.

BEYOND THE SIX STATES
Unite4Freedom’s broader election analysis has examined official records in 35 states and identified similar discrepancies in voter-registration and voter-history data. U4F’s state Election Validity Scorecards show that in the 35 states studied, there is not one state where the certified election tally (ballots counted) matches the number of voters recorded as having voted in the election.

Our research has been used in multiple federal lawsuits, and we intend to continue publishing reports and pursuing legal and legislative remedies based on its findings.

Valid elections are guaranteed in the Constitution and are the foundation of our Republic. Citizens have a right to demand accuracy. If elections are not lawful or accurate, then who is ultimately selecting our representatives?

To learn more or to donate in support our work and legal action, visit: www.Unite4Freedom.com

In New York, 2.9 Million Suspected Violations of Federal Law Across Three Election Cycles

★★★

Unite4Freedom (U4F) just released its most recent Vote Tampering Reports for New York State’s 2020, 2022 and 2024 general elections. Comparing successive timestamped snapshots of New York’s official voter records, U4F analysts exposed changes made to voter participation history after certification in each election. Each snapshot analyzed is the state’s official record of who voted and when they voted—not how they voted—which should have been preserved and maintained as part of the official election record.

Exactly What Do The Reports Show?

The five successive comparisons of data from snapshots, ranging from December 10, 2024 to June 2, 2026 across the last three federal election cycles, exposed the following types of changes:
• Vote histories deleted after election
• Vote histories added after election
• Voter and their history deleted after initially being recorded
• Voter and participation added after the election.
In 2024, there were 682,515 changes.
In 2022, there were 613,130 changes.
In 2020, there were 1,632,643 changes.

These are changes made to a voter’s history AFTER the election was certified. The frequency, type, and number of changes over time suggest these are not simple, normal, or random mistakes. And we have found this in multiple elections and in several other states.

The complete New York Vote Tampering Reports along with additional reports previously released are available at unite4freedom.com/reports/vote-tampering-reports/.

A Fundamental Question About Certification

Under both federal and state law, when election officials certify election results, they are signing their name to an official document attesting that they complied with the required election processes, counted the ballots, and are claiming the results are accurate.

So, if election results were accurate when they were certified, why is voter participation associated with those certified elections continuing to change years later?

“Except for minor changes, either the official certified records were accurate at the time of certification, and significant changes should not have been made, OR the records weren’t accurate, in which case they should NOT have been certified,” says U4F Chairman, Harry Haury. “There is no third option! The official records show massive changes, and election officials must explain why.”

Federal Elections Must Follow Federal Law

The Help America Vote Act requires states to maintain a single, uniform, official statewide voter registration list containing every legally registered voter, while federal record-retention laws require preservation of election records sufficient to document the results and conduct of federal elections.

Alleged federal requirements at issue:
• Maintenance of an ACCURATE, official statewide voter-registration list. (52 USC § 21083(a)(1), (a)(4))
• Retention of records sufficient to explain any discrepancy between the certified ballot count and
participation history. (52 USC § 20701, 22-month federal retention requirement)
• Provision of an audit trail—date, requester, reason, authority, and reconciliation effect—
for post-certification changes. (52 USC § 21083(a)(1)(A), (a)(2))
• Maintenance of election records in complete, auditable form, retained either directly by election officials or under their direct administrative supervision. (US Dept. of Justice, Civil Rights Div., Federal Law Constraints on Post-Election “Audits” (Apr. 2024), interpreting 52 USC §§ 20701–20706)

U4F is Asking New York Election Officials to Publicly Explain:
• Why are certified voter participation history records continuing to change years after the elections?
• Who authorized those changes, under what authority, and where are the records that demonstrate the reason for those changes?
• What controls exist to prevent unauthorized modification of election records?
• How can citizens have confidence in the result of their elections and independently verify that certified election records are accurate and complete?

New York and Beyond

The New York Vote Tampering Reports are part of a national effort examining election records maintained by state election officials across the country. Similar analyses conducted by Unite4Freedom have identified post-certification record changes in at least seven other states, with several additional reports on the way.

In Texas, U4F measured apparent vote tampering DURING the 2024 General Election and the 2026 Democratic and Republican Primary Elections. These reports expose problems that happen too frequently and follow patterns that don’t occur by chance or simple mistakes. The way the data changes over time suggests intentional or automated manipulation, not normal reporting errors.
These vote tampering issues are repeated and significant and must be formally investigated and reviewed under state and federal election laws including record by record reconciliation and correction if necessary.

Unite4Freedom’s broader election analysis of official records in 35 states identifying apparent violations of election law are summarized in our State Election Validity Scorecards. In addition to apparent violations in registration and voting, these reports demonstrate that there is not one state where the certified election tally (ballots counted) matches the number of voters recorded as having voted in the election.

Our research has been used in multiple federal lawsuits, and we are continuing to pursue transparency and legitimacy based on our findings.

★★★

“Valid elections are guaranteed in the Constitution and are the foundation of our Republic,“ says Haury. “Citizens have a right to demand accuracy. If elections are not accurate, then who is ultimately selecting our representatives?”

★★★

NEW REPORT: NEW YORK

2.9 million post-certification changes to voter history records across three federal elections:
2020: 1,632,643
2022: 613,130
2024: 682,515

When will the people, the courts and the representatives demand transparency and legally legitimate elections.

The elections were certified.
Why do voter histories keep changing?

https://unite4freedom.com/in-new-york-2-9-million-suspected-violations-of-federal-law-across-three-election-cycles-2/

Learn more at unite4freedom.com

Please be sure to join us! Online or in person if you happen to be in Wester New York.

Vote Tampering in Alaska?
36,352 Suspected Violations of Federal Law

Unite4Freedom (U4F) released its Alaska Vote Tampering Report. U4F analysts compared voter participation history from multiple timestamped snapshots of Alaska’s official voter records. The report focuses on changes made after election certification and after official election records should have been preserved and maintained. The voter participation history changes affect the 2020, 2022, and 2024 federal election cycles.

What Do the Reports Show?

The analysis compared three snapshots of data (December 2, 2024 to May 30, 2025 and then May 30, 2025 to November 3, 2025) across the last three federal election cycles, and found the following types of changes:
• Vote → No vote
• No vote → Vote
• Voter and participation history present in first snapshot, missing in the second
• Voter absent in the first snapshot, present with a participation history for the election in the second.

In 2024, there were 1,619 changes made.
In 2022, there were 9,362 changes made.
In 2020, there were 25,371 changes made.

These Findings Raise a Fundamental Question

If election results were accurate when certified, why are voter histories associated with those certified elections continuing to change years later?

Under both federal and state law, election officials certify election results as accurate. Certification represents an official declaration that election processes were completed, ballots were counted, and results are correct.

Either election officials certified records that were not accurate at the time certification occurred, or changes were made to official federal election records after certification. There is not a third option! The records changed, and election officials must explain why.

“What exactly did Alaska certify?” asks U4F Chairman, Harry Haury. “Election certification is supposed to be a final statement that election records are accurate. Certified election records should not change after the election is over. Citizens are entitled to transparency, accountability, and proof that election results are accurate and election records are accurate at the time of certification and don’t change after certification.”

Alleged Federal Requirements at Issue

• Maintenance of an accurate, official statewide voter-registration list. (52 USC § 21083(a)(1), (a)(4))
• Retention of records sufficient to explain any discrepancy between the certified ballot count and participation history. (52 USC § 20701, 22-month federal retention requirement)
• Provision of an audit trail—date, requester, reason, authority, and reconciliation effect—for post-certification changes. (52 USC § 21083(a)(1)(A), (a)(2))
• Maintenance of election records in complete, auditable form, retained either directly by election officials or under their direct administrative supervision. (US Dept. of Justice, Civil Rights Div., Federal Law Constraints on Post-Election “Audits” (Apr. 2024), interpreting 52 USC §§ 20701–20706)

Federal Elections Must Follow Federal Law

The Help America Vote Act requires states to maintain a single, uniform, official statewide voter registration list containing every legally registered voter, while federal record-retention laws require preservation of election records sufficient to document the results and conduct of federal elections.

The Alaska report is part of a broader national series examining election records maintained by state election officials. Similar analyses conducted by Unite4Freedom have identified post-certification record changes in multiple other states as well.

U4F is calling on Alaska election officials to publicly explain:
• Why do certified voter history records continue to change years after the elections?
• Who authorized those changes, under what authority, and where are the records that demonstrate those changes?
• What controls exist to prevent unauthorized modification of election records?
• How can citizens have confidence in the result of their elections and independently verify that certified election records are accurate and complete?

The complete Alaska Vote Tampering Report along with those of additional states are available at unite4freedom.com/reports/vote-tampering-reports/.

Beyond Alaska

Unite4Freedom’s broader election analysis has examined official records in 35 states identifying discrepancies in voter-registration and voter-history data. The results are summarized in our State Election Validity Scorecards. In addition to apparent violations in registration and voting, these reports show that there is not one state where the certified election tally (ballots counted) matches the number of voters recorded as having voted in the election.

Our research has been used in multiple federal lawsuits, and we intend to continue publishing reports and pursuing legal and legislative remedies based on our findings.

“Valid elections are guaranteed in the Constitution and are the foundation of our Republic,“ says Haury. “Citizens have a right to demand accuracy. If elections are not accurate, then who is ultimately selecting our representatives?”

★★★
Additional state reports are available at Unite4Freedom.com/reports.

Please follow us and consider supporting our work: www.Unite4Freedom.com/donate.

ILLINOIS VOTER FILES HAVA COMPLAINT DEMANDING PROOF SUPPORTING THE 2024 ELECTION CERTIFICATION

On July 23, 2026, an Illinois voter and election judge filed a verified administrative complaint with the Illinois State Board of Elections (ISBE) under the Help America Vote Act (HAVA). (52 USC § 21112, HAVA § 402) Drawing on data analytics from Unite4Freedom, the complaint asks a single question:

Can the State produce a preserved, auditable statewide voter-registration record supporting its certification of the 2024 General Election?

The legal question is whether the Illinois Voter Registration System (IVRS) fulfilled its federally assigned role as the single, official statewide voter-registration list. (52 USC § 21083(a)(1), HAVA § 303)

THREE EVIDENCE STREAMS

1. Registration eligibility.
Votes were counted from 1,045,659 unique registrants whose records reportedly contain violations that would render them ineligible. (52 USC § 20507, NVRA list-maintenance requirements)

2. Reconciliation gap.
Illinois certified 5,705,246 ballots in 2024; an official January 2025 IVRS file credits only 5,649,082 registrants with participation—a gap of 56,164. (52 USC § 21083(a)(4), minimum accuracy standards)

3. Post-certification alterations.
A comparison of two official IVRS extracts (January 24, 2025 and May 13, 2026) shows 254,027 changes to 2024 participation history:

Change Type Count
Vote → No vote 109,976
No vote → Vote 15,119
Present Jan. 2025, missing May 2026 11,268
Absent Jan. 2025, appears May 2026 17,664

The complainant’s own record was separately found to have been deleted at the State level in error, without a matching county-level deletion or a documented authorization for the change.

ALLEGED FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS AT ISSUE

• Maintenance of an accurate, official statewide voter-registration list. (52 USC § 21083(a)(1), (a)(4))
• Retention of records sufficient to explain any discrepancy between the certified ballot count and participation history. (52 USC § 20701, 22-month federal retention requirement)
• Provision of an audit trail—date, requester, reason, authority, and reconciliation effect—for post-certification changes. (52 USC § 21083(a)(1)(A), (a)(2))
• Maintenance of election records in complete, auditable form, retained either directly by election officials or under their direct administrative supervision. (US Dept. of Justice, Civil Rights Div., Federal Law Constraints on Post-Election “Audits” (Apr. 2024), interpreting 52 USC §§ 20701–20706)

The complaint frames this as a continuing violation because the same IVRS system will serve as the voter list for the November 2026 General Election, and any unresolved recordkeeping failure is characterized as “about to occur” again within the meaning of the statute. (52 USC § 21112(a)(2)(B) (complaint may address a violation that “has occurred, is occurring, or is about to occur”)

PRESERVATION DEADLINE

The complaint cites the federal election-record preservation statute, (52 USC § 20701), and calculates the 22-month retention period for the November 5, 2024 election as expiring September 5, 2026. It asks that no identified record be altered, destroyed, or overwritten while the complaint and any judicial review remain pending, and gives notice to ISBE, its vendors, and county election authorities.

DOJ guidance interpreting this requirement instructs that covered records must remain complete and accessible for review—retained by election officials themselves or under their direct administrative supervision—so that the records can support exactly this kind of audit.

RELIEF REQUESTED

The complaint does not seek to overturn any result, order a recount, remove voters from the rolls, or allege criminal intent. It asks ISBE to accept the filing, hold a hearing under HAVA § 402 (52 USC § 21112(a)(2)(E)), and to fully investigate the discrepancies identified above.
Specifically, the complaint requests that ISBE:
(1) identify and preserve all relevant records;
(2) investigate and reconcile the discrepancies between the certified ballot count and IVRS participation history;
(3) issue formal, written findings and a final determination on HAVA compliance (52 USC § 21112(a)(2)(F));
(4) order corrective action to resolve any confirmed violations; and
(5) adopt lasting controls and policy—including audit-trail, change-authorization, and record-retention procedures—to prevent these problems from recurring in future elections.

BEYOND ILLINOIS

Unite4Freedom’s broader election analysis has examined official records in 35 states and identified similar discrepancies in voter-registration and voter-history data. Our State Election Validity Scorecards show that in those 35 states studied, there is not one state where the certified election tally (ballots counted) matches the number of voters recorded as having voted in the election.

Our research has been used in multiple federal lawsuits, and we intend to continue publishing reports and pursuing legal and legislative remedies based on its findings.

“Valid elections are guaranteed in the Constitution and are the foundation of our Republic. Citizens have a right to demand accuracy. If elections are not accurate, then who is ultimately selecting our representatives?”

★★★

Additional state reports are available at:
www.Unite4Freedom.com/reports.

Illinois is not the only state where apparent legal violations are flooding our elections systems. Visit Unite4Freedom.com/reports to see the results of our analyses in over 35 states.

All of this evidence supports President Trump’s information about the vulnerabilities in our voting systems, and we are working toward solutions that can help impact the security of the 2026 midterms, but we need your help exposing the problems to the American people and funding the legal pathways currently underway.

Learn more at Unite4Freedom.com

Unite4Freedom Report Raises Illinois Election Validity Questions, Calls for Transparency on Post-Certification Record Changes — Yorkville Herald By |  Michael Krempski Election-validity organization Unite4Freedom (U4F) has released a report stating that hundreds of thousands of changes were made to Illinois voter-history records after federal elections had already been certified, raising questions about election-record

MASSIVE VOTE TAMPERING IN CALIFORNIA SIGNALS SIGNIFICANT CONCERN

Unite4Freedom (U4F) just released its California Vote Tampering report for the 2020, 2022 and 2024 elections. U4F’s analysis shows that there is good reason to question the accuracy of California’s elections.

Voter history information is being changed after certification—this should NEVER happen! Certification is an attestation of accuracy and compliance. Official election records are required by law to be maintained and preserved as auditable records of election results. Once an election has been certified, all voters who were recorded as having voted in the election at the time of certification should NEVER change for any election unless there is specific documentation for why those changes were made. Therefore, modifications to those records are a violation of law!

WHAT TYPES OF CHANGES ARE BEING MADE?
In addition to maintaining accurate personal information, such as name, birthdate, address, registration date, etc., in voter registration files, election officials are required to maintain a record of what elections the voter participated in—their voting history. While a voter’s name or address may be updated over time, their voting history should NEVER change, unless there is specific documentation for why those changes were made.

U4F VOTE TAMPERING REPORTS: EVIDENCE THAT THE RECORDS HAVE CHANGED.
Unite4Freedom obtained multiple timestamped snapshots of the official California Voter participation records for the 2020, 2022 and 2024 elections. U4F analysts studied two sets of comparisons of those certified voter history records from each election. The findings are highlighted below:

2020 General Election
– 1,111,963 voter history changes were made to the official certified records for the 2020 election when comparing the voter history records from Dec 7, 2023 to those from May 21, 2024.
– 1,014,345 changes were made when comparing voter history records from May 21, 2024 and
September 10, 2024.
– Over 2 million edits were made to the 2020 voter history information—YEARS after CA’s 2020 election!

2022 General Election
– 552,571 total changes were made to voter history records for the 2022 election using the same voter roll snapshots that were analyzed for the 2020 election above.

2024 General Election
– 58,799 changes were made to the 2024 voter history records when comparing December 16, 2024 to December 30, 2024—Almost 59,000 changes to voters’ participation histories made two weeks after the CA 2024 election was certified.
– 195,404 changes to voter history records were made between December 30, 2024 and April 7, 2025.

THE QUESTION THAT MUST BE ANSWERED BY ELECTION OFFICIALS…
• If election results were accurate when certified, why are voters’ participation histories from those elections continuing to change years later?

CERTIFICATION IS A LEGAL ATTESTATION OF ACCURACY, NOT A RUBBER STAMP.
Certifying without reconciliation violates CA Elections Code §15372–15375. Knowingly submitting false certifications can trigger felonies under 52 U.S.C. §20511 and 18 U.S.C. §1001. The law requires that vote totals be reconciled to verified voters before certification. If the data shows unverified voter rolls or mismatched counts, certification is premature and legally indefensible.

Citizens have a right to demand accuracy in our elections. If elections are not accurate then who is selecting our representatives?

U4F is calling on California election officials to publicly explain:
• Why do California certified voter history records continue to change years after the elections?
• Who authorized those changes, under what authority, and where are the records that demonstrate those changes?
• What controls exist to prevent unauthorized modification of election records?
• How can California citizens have confidence in the result of their elections and independently verify that certified election records are accurate and complete?

FOR MORE INFORMATION
Visit unite4freedom.com/reports/vote-tampering-reports/ for the complete California Vote Tampering Report along with vote tampering reports for additional states.

Visit unite4freedom.com/reports/ to view U4F’s extensive reports, including Election Validity Scorecards for CA and 34 other states, Vote to Voter Discrepancy reports, and Phantom Voter Reports, as well as Vote Tampering reports.

Please consider supporting our work unite4freedom.com/donate

The DOJ just sent a seismic shockwave through election offices nationwide.

Warning letters have officially been dropped on ALL 50 states and Washington D.C.

The mandate from Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon is crystal clear: Clean the voter rolls or face federal criminal prosecution. Any election administrator who knowingly retains noncitizens on voter lists or facilitates illegal voting is now on notice for federal criminal liability and conspiracy.

With a strict 5-day ultimatum to prove compliance, the pushback from state officials has been immediate across the aisle. But let’s be entirely clear: upholding the law is not "intimidation" - it is a foundational requirement. Our election processes must strictly adhere to the existing laws designed to protect the integrity of the ballot box. Period.

This unprecedented federal action mirrors the exact data forensics and transparency standards we champion every single day at Unite4Freedom (U4F). For years, our mission has been the pursuit of valid, certifiable elections that are fully transparent and auditable.

The DOJ’s sweeping nationwide demand directly validates our data team has known all along: maintaining accurate, legally compliant voter rolls is the baseline of a secure republic.

The law is the law. It’s time for every state to comply, scrub the data, and restore absolute trust.