EDRIElection Dispute Resolution Index
How robust are mechanisms to resolve election disputes?
Dimensions
Contest
80.0% · 4/5| Datapoint | Score | Rationale & evidence | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| CONT.EDRI.1Standing enumeratedAre the parties with standing to contest an election (candidate, party, qualified voters of the precinct, AG, etc.) enumerated in statute? | 0/10.0% | No candidate sections returned by FTS. | no FTS match 2026-05-17 |
| CONT.EDRI.2Venue & jurisdictionIs the court of original jurisdiction for election contests specified by statute? | 1/1100.0% | Cal. Elec. Code § 16400 codifies the superior court as the venue of original jurisdiction for election contests: 'When an elector contests any election he or she shall file with the clerk of the superior court having jurisdiction a written statement.' Reinforced by § 16603 (court continues in session), § 16701/16703 (court declares correct elected person). | § view source 2026-05-17 |
| CONT.EDRI.3Filing deadlineIs the deadline for filing an election contest (days after certification, or after a defined event) specified by statute? | 1/1100.0% | Cal. Elec. Code § 16603 codifies the contest-decision deadline: 'After hearing the proofs and allegations of the parties and within 10 days after the submission thereof, the court shall file its findings of fact and conclusions of law.' Combined with § 16462 (filing deadline: 5 days after the official canvass — referenced in EAI REG.4 candidates). | § view source 2026-05-17 |
| CONT.EDRI.4Standard of proof & evidenceAre the standard of proof and admissibility rules for election-contest evidence codified in statute? | 2/2100.0% | Cal. Elec. Code § 16602 codifies the evidentiary regime: 'In the trial and determination of election contests, the court shall be governed by the rules of law and evidence governing the determination of questions of law and fact, so far as the same may be applicable.' Standards of proof, admissibility, and dismissal are codified by reference to the general code of civil procedure. | § view source 2026-05-17 |
Recount
100.0% · 4/4| Datapoint | Score | Rationale & evidence | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| RECT.1Statutory recount procedureAre recount procedures (who counts, how, with what evidence) defined in statute, not regulation or administrative directive? | 1/1100.0% | Cal. Elec. Code § 15627 codifies the recount method-choice (manual or voting-system); § 15625 codifies the recount-board composition (4 individuals appointed by elections official); § 15629 mandates that 'The recount shall be conducted publicly.'; § 15601 directs SoS to adopt regulations; § 15631 codifies the ballot-challenge procedure during recount. Comprehensive statutory recount procedure. | § view source 2026-05-17 |
| RECT.2Recount triggers enumeratedAre the triggers for an automatic or petition-based recount enumerated in statute (margin thresholds, sworn challenge, etc.)? | 1/1100.0% | Cal. Elec. Code § 15640(a) codifies the DA-petition-based recount mechanism on request of board of supervisors or grand jury — a sworn-challenge trigger. § 15645 codifies governor-ordered state-funded recount triggers for statewide office/measures meeting specified conditions. Petition-based and state-initiated recount triggers are both statutorily codified. | § view source 2026-05-17 |
| RECT.3Recount cost allocationIs the cost of a petition-based recount allocated by statute (who pays under what outcome)? | 1/1100.0% | Cal. Elec. Code § 16503 codifies the default cost rule: contestant pays in the first instance, with daily deposits sufficient to cover accrued recount expenses. § 15624 mirrors this for voter-requested recounts. § 15645 carves out state-funded recounts for specific statewide triggers. § 16801 allows discretionary apportionment in joined contests. “The contestant shall, in the first instance, be liable for the expenses involved in making any recount.” | § view source 2026-05-17 |
| RECT.4Recount-finding effectAre the legal effects of a recount finding (binding, advisory, mandatory amendment) codified in statute? | 1/1100.0% | Cal. Elec. Code § 16740 codifies the recount-finding effect: 'When the recount has been completed... all the judges who took part... shall assemble and make the decision of the court.' § 15633 mandates public posting of recount results. § 16701/16703 enable annulment of certificates and judicial declaration of correct winner if recount changes outcome. Recount findings are binding. | § view source 2026-05-17 |
Timing
50.0% · 1/2| Datapoint | Score | Rationale & evidence | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| TIME.1Certification deadline in statuteIs the certification deadline (when the result becomes 'official') set by statute, not by administrative discretion? | 1/1100.0% | Cal. Elec. Code § 15301 codifies the canvass-start deadline (Thursday following election) and 30-day completion deadline. § 15501 codifies the SoS compilation deadline. § 15620 codifies the 5-day recount-request window after official canvass. Certification timeline is fully statutory. “The canvass shall commence no later than the Thursday following the election, shall be open to the public, and, for state or statewide elections, shall result in a report of results to the Secretary of State.” | § view source 2026-05-17 |
| TIME.2Pre-certification stayDoes statute provide a mechanism to stay certification while a recount or contest is pending? | 0/10.0% | No candidate sections returned by FTS. | no FTS match 2026-05-17 |