In a move that could determine the outcome of a tightly contested Republican primary, State Sen. Spencer Deery of West Lafayette filed two motions on Monday asking the Indiana Supreme Court to assume jurisdiction of a recount case and to halt the certification of his opponent, Paula Copenhaver, on upcoming general‑election ballots.
Background of the dispute
The Indiana Recount Commission dismissed Copenhaver’s election contest on Aug. 10 but issued a recount certificate showing her with 6,332 votes to Deery’s 6,329. That reversed the original certified result, which had Deery ahead by three votes (6,337 to 6,334) after the May 5 Republican primary.
Deery’s appeal focuses on six ballots cast in Montgomery, Vermillion and Warren counties that were rejected because they lacked a circuit court clerk’s official seal and signature. Deery argues that the voters presented valid identification and voted in person, so the ballots should be counted, which would return him to a three‑vote lead.
Legal arguments
Indiana law requires the back of an absentee ballot to bear the clerk’s seal or signature. Deery’s attorneys contend that a clerk’s omission does not constitute fraud, tampering, or misconduct, and therefore the ballots should be counted under a statute that allows a ballot to be accepted when an election officer’s error is the sole reason for its rejection.
They also note that the law expressly excludes ballots lacking bipartisan election‑worker initials from this protection, but does not apply the same exclusion to ballots missing a clerk’s seal. The legal brief cites the statute’s language that an election officer’s mistake “is not by itself evidence of fraud, tampering, or misconduct affecting the integrity of the ballot.”
Potential impact on the November ballot
If the Supreme Court accepts the transfer and grants an emergency stay, Copenhaver’s name could be removed from the general‑election ballot while the case proceeds. Deery warned that allowing the six ballots to remain excluded would set a “single biggest threat to election security” he has seen in Indiana in decades, arguing that election workers could deliberately withhold seals to influence outcomes.
Both sides have prepared extensive records. Deery has ordered transcripts and exhibits from the recount proceedings and shared them with the opposing counsel. The Court of Appeals would need to decide whether the clerk errors merit a reversal of the Recount Commission’s certification before the November 3 general election, when counties must finalize and print ballots.
Political context
The primary has been unusually contentious. Copenhaver, who received an endorsement from former President Donald Trump, challenged Deery’s victory after provisional ballots were reviewed. Deery, in turn, criticized Copenhaver’s request for voter subpoenas, calling the effort an intimidation tactic.
Deery also noted that Trump has targeted several Indiana Republican senators who opposed the governor’s mid‑decade redistricting plan, adding a broader partisan backdrop to the local dispute.
Next steps
The Supreme Court’s decision on the emergency transfer will set the timetable for further briefs. If granted, Deery’s opening brief would be due within five days, followed by a rapid exchange of responses and replies. The court’s ruling could determine whether the six contested ballots are counted and whether Copenhaver’s name appears on the November ballot.
Regardless of the outcome, the case underscores the importance of clear election procedures and the role of state courts in resolving close races that hinge on a handful of votes.
Original reporting: 93.1 WIBC (Indianapolis) — read the source article.
