EAIElectoral Access Index

The statute codifies three procedural safeguards for election administration independence: (1) the board of registration is appointed by the board of county commissioners at a specified regular meeting; (2) membership is statutorily capped at five (or three in class B counties) with fixed composition; and (3) balanced political composition is mandated by statute—no more than two members may be from the same political party. These provisions establish clear, enumerated requirements for board independence in statute rather than administrative discretion.

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: This section addresses qualifications for appointment to a redistricting committee, not voting eligibility requirements. It contains no information about minimum age or residency requirements for voting, which would be the subject matter of the criterion. The criterion asks whether such requirements are set in the constitution; this statute section does not address voting eligibility at all.

The section codifies disqualification (felony conviction triggers registration cancellation) in statute, enumerates three explicit restoration pathways (unconditional discharge, completion of parole/probation, or overturned conviction), and assigns the Secretary of State a clear monthly maintenance duty. However, the statute does not provide a cure/appeal mechanism for voters wrongly disqualified or denied restoration—it supplies the eligibility conditions but not the procedural remedy if those conditions are disputed or incorrectly assessed.

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: This section addresses provisional ballot handling and disposition after polls close, not the restoration of voting rights lost due to felony conviction or other disqualifying events. The section deals with correcting registration errors (subsections D–E) and ballot eligibility issues (subsections F–G), but contains no statutory procedures, deadlines, or automatic restoration mechanisms for voters whose rights were previously lost. The criterion requires codified restoration procedure with statutory deadlines; this section does not address that topic.

NMSA 1978, § 1-12-8 explicitly sets in statute the requirement for voter identification at the point of in-person voting. Section B(4) and C establish that a voter must present 'physical form of the required voter identification' to the election judge or vote provisionally. The statute grounds this requirement directly in law rather than delegating it to regulatory or administrative discretion.

“does not present to the election judge a physical form of the required voter identification”

The statute exhaustively enumerates acceptable ID forms in three categories (photo ID, documentary evidence with name and address, and verbal/written statement) with specific examples provided. The enumeration is set directly in statute with no delegation to administrative discretion, and the voter may choose among these specified forms.

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: This section concerns voting system certification and testing procedures administered by the secretary of state. It contains no provisions related to voter identification requirements, free alternative IDs, or any aspect of voter qualification or access at the ballot. The criterion asks about free state-issued ID availability for voters; this statute addresses entirely different subject matter (equipment certification).

This section defines when provisional ballots are counted or rejected (including non-signature and registration issues), but does not address the specific procedural cure mechanism for a voter who arrives without required ID at the polls. The statute establishes rejection conditions (§B–G) and administrative recordkeeping (§H), but contains no enumerated cure pathway (e.g., provisional ballot casting, affidavit completion, return-with-ID deadline) for the ID-deficient voter. The section also delegates rule-making authority to the Secretary of State (§I) rather than statutorily defining the cure procedure, leaving discretionary gaps in the voter's navigable remedies.

The statute codifies an appeal procedure for rejected provisional ballots (which include ID-related rejections) by specifying both the forum (county clerk) and the deadline (Friday prior to state canvassing board meeting). This provides clear statutory grounding and a defined appeal path, meeting the procedural-clarity standard even though the statute does not enumerate specific ID requirements in this section.

The section explicitly sets a statutory registration deadline in clear, enumerated terms: 28 days prior to election day. This is grounded directly in statute (NMSA 1978, § 1-4-8) and leaves no room for administrative discretion in setting the cutoff date. The deadline is quantified and unambiguous.

“to participate in an election, the deadline to register to vote or update an existing voter registration is twenty-eight days prior to that election”

The statute exhaustively enumerates four specific registration methods: paper form submission, online portal registration, electronic registration at motor vehicle division, and any other method prescribed by the secretary of state. These cover the primary channels (mail/paper, online, motor-voter, and administrative discretion for additional methods). The enumeration is statutorily grounded and specific.

The statute defines a clear cure procedure for incomplete registrations. When required information (including social security number) is missing, the county clerk must attempt to obtain it from specified sources (prior records, motor vehicle division, or secretary of state). If unsuccessful, the applicant may vote provisionally, and that ballot is counted once the information is provided or ascertained. This provides both an enumerated remedial action path and a concrete outcome mechanism—both statutory, not discretionary.

This section explicitly codifies in statute the right of a qualified elector (or party chair) to challenge a refused registration through an appeal mechanism. The right is enumerated directly in the statute and references a defined appeal procedure (§ 39-3-1.1), establishing both the substantive right and the procedural path.

This statute defines removal criteria (change of address within state, move to another state, voter request) directly in statute rather than delegating to regulation, satisfying the statutory grounding element. However, the criterion asks about death and inactivity—two common roll-maintenance triggers—neither of which is addressed in this section. The section covers only address-change and voter-initiated cancellation, making it an incomplete treatment of the full roll-maintenance landscape.

The statute sets clear, enumerated procedures in law: (1) mandatory notice sent 90–120 days before a general election, (2) a postage-prepaid return card with explicit instructions, (3) a cure period extending from the notice date through the day after the second general election (at least two years), during which a voter may respond or vote to remain registered, and (4) cancellation only after meeting strict conditions (failure to respond and failure to vote during the cure window). All elements are statutory, not discretionary.

The statute requires the secretary of state to ensure security and confidentiality of online voter registration systems, but it does not codify specific procedural requirements: no encryption standards are enumerated, no breach notification protocol is established, and no access-log or audit-trail requirements are specified. The mandate is aspirational and delegated to the secretary of state's discretion rather than set forth in statute with defined procedures.

The statute mandates bilingual assistance (English and Spanish) and oral assistance for unwritten minority languages, but does not codify a specific numerical or percentage threshold that triggers when language assistance becomes mandatory. The criterion asks whether triggers or thresholds are codified in statute; this section provides a blanket mandate for Spanish but does not enumerate the threshold(s) that govern when other language assistance is required.

“All registration or voting notices, forms, instructions, assistance or other information relating to the electoral process shall be printed in both English and Spanish.”

The statute codifies both the right to assistance for voters meeting enumerated conditions (blind, physically disabled, unable to read/write, language minority) and exhaustively specifies who may assist (a person of the voter's choosing, explicitly excluding employers, union agents, and candidates). The rule is set by statute with clear eligibility triggers and enumerated restrictions on assistants, satisfying the criterion for statutory codification of disability assistance rights and procedures.

The statute codifies assistance for voters unable to read by explicitly authorizing a registration officer or agent to complete the registration certificate and permitting a mark signature. While the section addresses registration assistance rather than in-booth ballot assistance, it demonstrates statutory recognition of and procedure for literacy-based accommodation, meeting the codification requirement of ASSIST.3 with defined procedural steps.

The statute sets only a narrow parameter band (8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.) within which county clerks may set hours, leaving the actual opening and closing times to administrative discretion. The only hard statutory requirement is a 7:00 a.m. opening on election day itself; all other hours are determined by the county clerk. This does not satisfy the procedural-clarity standard because the key procedural rule (specific hours) is delegated to the administrator, not enumerated in statute.

This section codifies a cure procedure (replacement ballot or provisional ballot after affidavit) and voids the original mailed ballot, satisfying the cure element. However, the section does NOT address the full mail-in voting procedure: it lacks statutory codification of application procedures, application deadlines, return deadlines, or signature verification procedures. The statute delegates affidavit form and voiding procedures to the Secretary of State, introducing discretion. Only the replacement/provisional ballot remedy pathway is fully enumerated in statute.

§ 1-6-6 addresses only the administrative recordkeeping for absentee ballots (the ballot register itself), not the substantive framework elements—eligibility criteria, application procedures, return methods, or treatment rules. The statute requires tracking of applications, rejections, and receipt, but does not enumerate eligibility standards, application deadlines, cure procedures, or ballot treatment rules. The section references § 1-6-5 for documentary identification requirements but does not establish that provision itself. A complete absentee voting framework requires statutory codification of who may vote absentee, how they apply, how they return ballots, and how ballots are treated; this section provides only the procedural record-keeping mechanism, not the substantive rules.

The statute sets the early voting period with specific dates (28 days before election through Saturday before election) and enumerated locations/hours directly in statutory text. The requirement that county clerks establish alternate voting locations based on county voter size is also statutorily mandated with specific numerical minimums. No discretionary gaps exist regarding when or where early voting occurs.

No matching sections in corpus.

The statute establishes the right to cast a provisional ballot and enumerates a complete adjudication procedure: mandatory written instructions to voters, a free access system (toll-free or internet) to check status, mail notification of rejection with reason, and a defined appeal deadline (Friday prior to state canvassing board meeting) and process (appeal to county clerk). All key procedural elements—notification, reason-giving, cure/appeal path, and timeline—are set by statute rather than left to administrative discretion.