New Election Security Act Mandates 22-Month Equipment Preservation and Fast-Track Federal Lawsuits

The Protecting Election Administration from Interference Act of 2025 is essentially an attempt to lock down every piece of the election process, from the paper ballot to the machine that reads it. The core change is simple: when election officials preserve records and papers after a federal election, they now must preserve the election equipment itself.

This isn't just about saving old hard drives. It means that the voting machines, scanners, and other gear used in a federal election must be preserved alongside the data. Officials can reuse the equipment for the next election, but only if that election happens within twenty-two months of the original federal contest. Crucially, even if they reuse the machine, all the electronic records and files from the prior federal election must be kept safe and preserved. If you're a local election administrator, this translates directly into a serious logistical lift: you need more secure storage space and a robust system for separating and securing election data for nearly two years.

The New Rules of Engagement for Election Gear

Within one year of this bill becoming law, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) has to team up with the Election Assistance Commission and the Attorney General to draft official guidance. This guidance will lay out the minimum standards and best practices for securing all this newly preserved equipment and data. This is where things get interesting: the guidance must include specific protocols that allow the Attorney General and representatives from each political party to observe how these materials are being preserved, secured, and transferred. While transparency sounds great, this provision could turn the highly technical process of data preservation into a politically charged observation session, potentially increasing friction for local officials.

Bigger Sticks for Misconduct and Intimidation

This bill significantly raises the stakes for anyone messing with election materials. Under current law, penalties apply if an officer destroys or alters records. This bill expands that, saying an officer can now be penalized if their reckless disregard of the preservation rules leads to the theft, destruction, or alteration of records, papers, or election equipment. 'Reckless disregard' is a subjective standard that puts local officials—already juggling tight budgets and short timelines—under much greater scrutiny. It means a mistake that results in lost data could lead to serious penalties, even if the official didn't intend to cause harm. For the people running elections, this is a major increase in personal liability.

Furthermore, the bill cracks down on intimidation. It updates the law to make it explicitly criminal to threaten or harass election workers while they are processing, tabulating, canvassing, or certifying results. This is a clear win for the people doing the hard work of counting votes, providing a much-needed layer of protection during the most sensitive part of the process.

Federal Court Gets a Fast Pass to Local Elections

Perhaps the biggest shift in power comes in Section 3, which creates a new path for judicial review. Now, the Attorney General or any candidate running in a federal election can sue in federal court if they believe a local official isn't complying with the preservation rules. They can file the lawsuit in the district where the equipment is located, or even in D.C. The court is then required to move the case up on the docket and process it as quickly as possible. This means that if a federal candidate suspects a local county clerk in, say, rural Oregon isn't preserving a scanner correctly, they can instantly drag that local official into federal court, demanding immediate action. This dramatically federalizes oversight of local administrative compliance and ensures that these disputes get resolved—or litigated—at warp speed.