A retired conservative judge’s challenge to claims about the 2020 election

This article was first published in the On the Trail 2024 newsletter. Sign up to receive the newsletter in your inbox on Tuesday and Friday mornings here.

Hello, friends.

3 things to know

The big idea

Relitigating 2020

Election Day is less than a month away. Nearly 2 million Americans have already cast their ballots. And yet, the 2020 election — and who was the rightful winner — is still a point of conflict.

At last week’s vice presidential debate, Vance refused to say whether Trump lost in 2020. The next day, Corey Lewandowski, a senior adviser on the Trump campaign, also refused to say. Trump still claims the 2020 election was rigged and frequently suggests that fraud will be the only thing preventing his victory next month, as he did at a rally in Butler, Pennsylvania, this weekend: “Stop the steal,” he said, “because we have a lot of votes. We have plenty of votes.”

Trump isn’t alone. Over one-third — 39% — of U.S. adults are not confident this year’s election will be conducted fairly and accurately, according to a Pew Research Center poll.

Can we trust November’s result to be accurate? Can we answer that question unless we know about 2020? When Trump began sowing doubts about the 2020 result, Thomas B. Griffith, a retired federal judge, decided to find out whether he was right. Griffith — a conservative George W. Bush appointee — was concerned, he told me. “If, in fact, the claims were true, that fraud had taken place, I can’t think of anything more troublesome or worrisome than that,” he said.

Griffith decided to recruit a group of fellow conservatives — including two other former judges, two retired U.S. senators and a former U.S. solicitor general — to dive into all of the claims that the 2020 election had been manipulated or stolen. They spent nine months poring over the evidence. In swing states across America, there were claims that voting machines had been compromised and that deceased individuals had cast votes. In Nevada, there were allegations of voter bribery and tampering with absentee ballots; in Arizona, rumors spread about voter-eligibility standards not being enforced.

The conclusion Griffith’s group came to? “Joe Biden won the election,” Griffith said. In fact, they found there was no evidence of fraud sufficient to change the outcome of the election in a single precinct across the country.

Griffith and his team published their findings in a 72-page report, published in 2022, titled “Lost, Not Stolen: The Conservative Case that Trump Lost and Biden Won the 2020 Presidential Election.”

As the 2024 election approaches, the report has found newfound importance. “Any political leader who undermines faith and trust in our current election system is doing damage to democracy, because they’re diminishing people’s trust in the system,” said Griffith, who did not reference any leader by name.

Griffith’s challenge to those who cast doubt on the election system? “Go look at it, study it,” he said. “I spent a year doing the same, and then you come back and tell me, it’s not trustworthy. I challenge you.”

I spoke with Griffith last week about the report. Our conversation is edited for length and clarity.

Deseret News: What was the genesis of this project? Why did you feel it was necessary?

Thomas Griffith: After the November (2020) election, President Trump and some of his supporters claimed that the election was fraudulent, and that it was stolen. That’s a pretty serious charge coming from a president of the United States. And I wanted to see if there was any basis to it, because if those claims are true, that’s really serious, right? And if they’re not true, that’s really serious as well.

I decided I was going to try and get to the bottom of this as best I could. I reached out to some fellow conservatives and asked if they would be interested in being involved in a project. We were going to go in open-minded. We were going to follow the evidence to see where it directed.

We spent eight, nine months doing a deep dive into all the contested states, the swing states, where the controversies mattered. We used data that had been collected by the law school at Ohio State University and other sources. We reached out to nonpartisan experts in data analysis and election analysis. The evidence was overwhelming. It wasn’t even close. Joe Biden won the election. We know exactly why he won the election and how he won the election.

One thing that doesn’t get a lot of attention, it seems, is Republicans did really well in that election down-ballot. It was Donald Trump that didn’t do well. And so the conspiracy theorists have to come up with some explanation for why Trump didn’t do well, on the very same ballots.

DN: The 2020 election has been, quite literally, litigated in courts across the country. What did you and the other retired judges on this project find upon studying those cases?

TG: Yes, three of us were former federal appeals court judges who had been appointed by Republican presidents. We felt that we knew a little bit about how to follow the evidence and how to evaluate claims. That’s sort of what you do as a judge.

There are over 60 court cases filed by the Trump campaign and Trump allies. The judgment was universal. There is no evidence of fraud to change the outcome in a single precinct, let alone in a state. And these were decisions rendered by judges who had been appointed by all sorts of different folks, including judges appointed by Donald Trump. To everyone who has looked at this in an objective fashion, the evidence all points in one direction, and that is that Joe Biden won, and Donald Trump lost.

None of the people who helped me put this report together voted for Joe Biden. None of us did. We were after the truth. Because, as I said, if in fact the claims were true that fraud had taken place, I can’t think of anything more troublesome or worrisome than that. If, on the other hand, as we discovered, those claims were baseless, I can think of few things that would serve to undermine trust in our American democracy more than that — when leaders are out there saying that our election administration system is rife with fraud. Boy, that strikes at the very heart of our democracy. And I can understand why people, believing that, would do something like storm the Capitol. People who believe the election was stolen do things like that.

DN: What did you learn about the American election system?

TG: Our election administration system is professionalized. It’s transparent. It is not perfect, but it is the best election administration system in the world. And that’s the message we ought to be telling people. This is like the crown jewel of our democracy: our election administration system staffed by Democrats, Republicans, independents. This is one of the most inspiring groups of people in America that I’ve met. They believe in democracy. They are committed to running transparent and fair elections.

Are there mistakes made? Yes. They are humans. There are mistakes made. But was there fraud that changed the outcome of the election? No.

Each of these claims of fraud, have been carefully studied. Over 40 states conducted post election audits and and it didn’t change the outcome of any election. And that’s in addition to the over 60 lawsuits that were brought, and they all rejected Trump’s claims. All of the conspiracy theories have been debunked by nonpartisan, objective sources.

That’s what got me motivated: if fraud happened, I wanted to know about it. If fraud didn’t happen, I want to know about that, too, so that we can tell the American people to have faith and confidence in our election administration.

Go to your election office and ask them to give you a tour. Meet these people who are certifying these elections. See what they’re like. Ask them your tough questions. They’ve got answers. They’ve got answers. There’s nothing dark and sinister going on here. Our election administration system is something we ought to be terribly proud of, instead of having these election administration officials harassed, threatened, hounded from office for fear about their personal safety. And those politicians who encourage that or don’t intervene to say, ‘stop that,’ are doing great damage to our American democracy.

DN: Do you view the rhetoric from former President Trump and from Sen. JD Vance as dangerous, if they’re casting doubt on the past election and the upcoming election?

TG: I think any political leader who undermines faith and trust in our current election system is doing damage to democracy, because they’re diminishing people’s trust in the system. My only answer for, ‘why do you have trust in the system,’ is, ‘go look at it, study it. I spent a year doing so. You do the same, and then you come back and tell me it’s not trustworthy. I challenge you.’ It’s a really good system that works really well, and worked really well in 2020.

Again, don’t get me wrong. It can be improved. It can be perfected. But there was no fraud in the 2020 election that changed the outcome of the vote in a single precinct, and anyone who claims otherwise is doing great damage to our democracy.

What I’m reading

The abortion debate will figure prominently in the homestretch of this race: Harris is attempting to make it a central issue, and Trump and Melania Trump are walking a tightrope between conservative and moderate voters. But this essay — written by a Reason editor in The Atlantic — shines a spotlight on one Democratic boogeyman: even as Harris, Walz and the rest deflect about third-trimester abortions, they are occurring, and they aren’t all borne of medical necessity. Yes, Third-Trimester Abortions Are Happening in America (Emma Camp, The Atlantic)

Is election polling an art or a science? It’s both — but also depends on the poll. Confused? This analysis is helpful in understanding why polling, especially this close to Election Day, feels so chaotic. A good read on what to look for in reliable polling: Why are election polls all over the place, and which should you pay attention to? (Tal Kopan, The Boston Globe)

Signs of cognitive decline booted Biden from the race. What happens if Trump starts showing similar signs? Several of Trump’s former cabinet secretaries are now saying those discussions occurred while Trump was in office — and, at times, cabinet members considered whether the 25th Amendment’s disability clause should be invoked to remove him from office. Trump’s Speeches, Increasingly Angry and Rambling, Reignite the Question of Age (Peter Baker and Dyland Freedman, The New York Times)

See you on the trail.

Editor’s note: The Deseret News is committed to covering issues of substance in the 2024 presidential race from its unique perspective and editorial values. Our team of political reporters will bring you in-depth coverage of the most relevant news and information to help you make an informed decision. Find our complete coverage of the election here.