Expert Commentary on U.S. Election Law: Interview with Stephen Kaufman

In an Exclusive Interview with Editor-In-Chief Jett James Pruitt, Attorney Stephen J. Kaufman Offers His Insight Into Campaign Finance Reform, Voting Laws, and the Future of American Elections

Interview Conducted by Jett James Pruitt

The following text is an interview between Editor-In-Chief Jett James Pruitt and Stephen J. Kaufman, founder and principal of the political law firm Kaufman Legal Group, dually-based in Sacramento and Los Angeles, California.

For more than three decades, the firm has specialized in campaign finance, election, and government law. Kaufman's client roster has included former Vice President Kamala Harris, Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, U.S. Senator Alex Padilla, and Representatives Maxine Waters, Ted Lieu, and Brad Sherman. His firm has also partnered with various civil society groups and organizations such as the Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce, the Los Angeles County Federation of Labor, the Los Angeles Dodgers, the California Community Foundation, and the SEIU United Healthcare Workers West.

Kaufman is a frequent contributor to various local and national media outlets, including CNN, CNBC, Bloomberg, POLITICO, and the Los Angeles Times.

JJP: Before we begin, I would like to thank you for agreeing to this interview for The Gen Z Post.

As of this writing, the SAVE Act has passed the House of Representatives and is currently under review in the Senate. What would be implications for the United States if the bill is ultimately signed into law? Do you view the legislation as a veiled attempt to restrict ethnic minorities and women from voting, or a necessary measure to further prevent voter fraud?

SJK: The SAVE Act is nothing more than a voter suppression tool to restrict ethnic minorities and other under-represented communities from voting.  The Act would require citizens to provide their birth certificates or passports to register to vote.  Many people do not have access to their birth records, and a surprising number of people do not have passports, making it extremely difficult for some people to register under these circumstances.

Further, given the current environment we’re living in, the mere fact that people would be required to provide these documents to government officials is intimidating enough that citizens who are here legally will be reluctant to register.  This is simply a new form of voter intimidation. 

JJP: President Trump’s executive order on August 3, 2026, to limit the use of mail-in ballots was partially blocked by a federal judge in Massachusetts. Can you explain to readers how the “Purcell principle” is poised to be tested in a Supreme Court case regarding the legality of Trump’s order?

SJK: The “Purcell Principle” arises from a 2006 Supreme Court case, Purcell v. Gonzalez, in which the Supreme court stated that federal courts should not change election rules right before an election to avoid causing voter confusion and disrupting the election.  President Trump issued an Executive Order earlier this year restricting states’ ability to conduct mail-in voting and requiring states to provide vote-by-mail ballots only to voters who are approved as citizens by the Department of Homeland Security.

The directive also provides for criminal prosecution of state election officials who issue ballots to individuals who are not eligible to vote.  If the Supreme Court were to stay the District Court’s ruling preventing the government from implementing this Executive Order, it would completely upend the procedures for casting mail-in ballots in a vast majority of states only weeks before they are due to be distributed, thereby causing the very type of chaos that the “Purcell Principle” was intended to prevent.

JJP: In line with my previous question, what are major federal statutes or Supreme Court cases surrounding the legal parameters of mail-in voting? Is there substantial precedent for this particular issue?

SJK: Our Constitution empowers the states – not the federal government -- to determine “the time, place and manner” of holding elections.  In furtherance of that authority, more and more states have passed laws the past couple of decades making it easier for voters to cast their ballots by mail.  Previously, most states required voters to apply for a vote-by-mail ballot, and many states required voters to provide a reason for voting by mail. 

Now, most states do not require voters to state a reason for requesting a vote-by-mail ballot, and some states automatically send vote-by-mail ballots to every registered voter.  In my state, California, vote-by-mail ballot envelopes contain pre-paid postage, and ballots that are deposited in the mail by election day will be counted as long as they are received by elections officials within seven days after the election.  This ensures that all ballots that are cast by election day – not after – are counted, despite any delays with mail delivery. 

The point is to make voting easier and increase voter participation.  A recent Supreme Court decision, Watson v Republican National Committee, upheld the right of states (in this case Mississippi) to count ballots that are postmarked by election day, but received within the state-mandated period after election day. 

JJP: As reported by the Council on Foreign Relations, 67 percent of Americans express “a great deal” or “a fair amount” of concern that political leaders will pressure election officials to change election outcomes. How can local and state public officials reassure voters across party lines that the upcoming midterm elections will be conducted fairly and free from intimidation?

SJK: My experience with election officials is that virtually all of them have the sole interest of making sure that elections are run freely and fairly.  They don’t want to have their integrity judged by questions about vote counting.  The problem, of course, is the pressure tactics coming from Washington and the brazen attempts to politicize the voting process.  It is important for state and local election officials to speak out and remain steadfast when confronted with false accusations and attempts to manipulate the outcome of an election. 

JJP: What is your view on gerrymandering? Would you support replacing the practice with independent commissions to redraw congressional maps?

SJK: I support replacing the practice of congressional district lines being drawn by state legislatures with the appointment of independent commissions.

We need to take politicization out of the redistricting process to give people confidence that outcomes aren’t being decided before they’ve even cast a ballot. The key to that, however, is in the commission appointment process -- implementing a procedure to identify individuals who are free of partisan influence but have enough knowledge of the political process to employ a complex set of criteria in drawing fair district lines.

We simply cannot continue to have a system that – as we’ve seen in this election cycle – can be subject to blatant partisan manipulation.      

JJP: How has the FEC changed under the Trump administration? Do you think the administration is corroding the agency’s autonomy?

SJK: The FEC has long suffered from the fact that it is set up for partisan gridlock. But that historic structural failing has now been taken to the extreme under the current administration. The agency does not even have a quorum – let alone a majority – to take action to enforce federal campaign finance laws.

JJP: Can you explain to readers how voting systems are regulated in the United States? Are they primarily regulated by state or federal law?

SJK:  As I mentioned earlier, Article I of the Constitution empowers the states to determine “the time, place and manner” of holding elections. 

While states historically have been given the latitude to conduct their own elections, Congress over the years has passed legislation providing states with additional tools for registering voters and implementing new voting equipment. 

For example, the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 required states to offer voters the opportunity to register by mail and at motor vehicle agencies.  The Help America Vote Act of 2002 provided funding to states that implemented new modernized voting systems subject to certain criteria.  It was left to the states, however, to decide what type of voting equipment made the most sense for their voters.  Even within states, jurisdictions (i.e., cities and counties) employ different types of voting equipment depending on the needs of their voters. 

JJP: Finally, to what extent do you believe allegations of extensive voter fraud are legitimate? Do you think most claims are exaggerated to induce changes in election outcomes, or are there legitimate concerns of misconduct?

SJK: In my three decades of observing elections, I have never seen any widespread voter fraud. The allegations of voter fraud coming from this administration are simply a convenient way to justify a negative election outcome and to sow doubt about the integrity of our elections.  There has yet to be any instance of proven fraud arising from the 2020 presidential election. 

Of course, over the years we have seen isolated incidents of fraud, usually carried out by a few zealous supporters.  But those incidents usually involve dozens, not thousands, of fraudulent ballots.  Never enough to change the outcome of an election. And there have been occasional glitches that resulted in ballots not being counted or voter names being inadvertently omitted from the voting rolls.  But those errors are almost always identified and corrected during the post-election vote canvass before the election results become final.  The idea that there is any widespread fraud in our elections is simply false.

JJP: Mr. Kaufman, thank you for your insight.

SJK: Thank you for the opportunity to weigh on these issues.

Stephen J. Kaufman is a campaign finance and election law attorney based in California. Since founding the Kaufman Legal Group in 1996, he has represented numerous high-profile elected officials, candidates, and political organizations, and serves as a frequent author and contributor on election issues.

His full biography can be accessed here: https://kaufmanlegalgroup.com/stephen-j-kaufman/

#ElectionLaw #USPolitics #USAElections #CurrentEvents #CampaignReform #VotingRights

What are your thoughts? Please share this article with your comments.