According to a March 7 recorded Zoom call, Maryland State Board of Elections (MDSBE) Director Jared DeMarinis and several state legislators believe the bill is specific enough to avoid infringement of First Amendment speech. However, others are not so sure. The two Republican legislators on the Election Law Subcommittee, Delegates April Miller and Mike Griffith, voiced their concerns about chilling speech. Even Denise Roberts, one of the more progressive delegates, argued the law could result in "subjective" decisions that could improperly target citizens.
First Amendment advocate Carl Szabo, Vice President and General Counsel of NetChoice, opposed HB0333 in February 2023. Szabo stated in his opposition testimony, "HB333's core provisions are unconstitutional under the First Amendment and under the Maryland State Constitution." He contends that by "mandating reporting on speech to the government, with names and other forms of personal information," citizens will fear reprisal and repression from the state. The bill no doubt compels speech, and he believes the legislature should turn its attention to the "improvement of election literacy for his citizens."
What Does HB0333 Require?
The amended bill (not officially posted) requires the Maryland SBE to take specific actions to counter election disinformation on large social media platforms. The original bill required social media platforms to contact the SBE "within 48 hours after a large social media platform becomes aware of an account or a post that communicates election disinformation." It also imposed hefty fines for not notifying the State Board. However, according to Stan Ward, a legislator who sits on the Ways and Means Committee, "there are no longer any requirements on large social media platforms to do anything with respect to election disinformation." Rather, the bill now only asks the SBE to notify social media platforms "when they become aware of election disinformation." Ward's statements are confirmed in the unofficial copy of the amended bill obtained by UncoverDC by a Maryland citizen. The amended bill passed through the subcommittee and will be voted on by the full committee before Monday, March 18, at 5 p.m.
Ward also states in the recorded discussion that the bill also requires the state to maintain a "voter suppression action portal" on its website. The public would use the portal to report election disinformation and voter suppression activities. The "SEB would then make referrals to the state prosecutor as appropriate," according to Ward. The Board will not be investigating election disinformation on its own. It doesn't have the resources to do so, according to DeMarinis. All election disinformation or voter suppression is "complaint-driven." In other words, activity would have to be reported through the portal by members of the public in Maryland, and the Board would then investigate the claims.
Delegate Mike Griffith (R) shared his views about what happened during the pandemic as an example of why he is concerned about the bill. Griffith pointed out:
"There were some things that they [the govt] said [during the pandemic] was misinformation, but then it turned out to be true. Like in 2020, people were kicked off social media platforms for saying COVID-19 came from a lab. But now we know that is actually true. How do we sort this stuff out?"
With regard to previous elections, Griffith also asserted both sides have made claims about the legitimacy of elections. His concern is that an investigation would possibly mean an infringement on a person's speech, [political or otherwise], concerning the conducting or results of an election.
Delegate Denise Roberts (D) was also concerned that judgments "about something being disinformation" could become subjective. "I feel like this bill opens the door to so many ambiguous issues. Issues with determining what is going to be disinformation." Roberts added, "How do we address that? The complaints are going to be subjective, and it will be up to the state board to determine on what needs to be referred and whatnot. My concern is that it opens the door to a lot of stuff that may not necessarily need to be added."
One citizen from a Maryland Election Integrity group posted her objections to the bill on Wednesday due to a possible vote on HB333 this week. She wrote that the definition of election disinformation provided by the bill will "squash a citizen's right to raise questions about election processes and outcomes and could subject voters to threats and intimidation if they voice their concerns."
UncoverDC contacted Kate Sullivan, whose lawsuit, which was joined by United Sovereign Americans against the Maryland State Board of Elections, was filed last week. She believes the bill has surfaced because citizens and groups like United Sovereign Americans hold the Maryland State Board of Elections accountable for their egregiously dirty voter rolls.
Sullivan wrote a letter to the Election Law Subcommittee and State Ways and Means Committee stating her objections to the bill. Sullivan says giving a state board the power and authority to investigate and adjudicate instances of mis- or disinformation is a "slippery slope." She asks, "Who decides what qualifies as "disinformation." Her letter continues:
"The past three years have seen an alarming trend in government officials pushing to punish citizens for disagreeing with them. The release of the Twitter files alone should give everyone on the committee pause in supporting any form of government censorship. Is it simply anything the government claims is "disinformation"? If not, how could you reasonably prove it was not? We all witnessed how this metric did not serve us with respect to the lab leak, the "effectiveness" of vaccines and social distancing, and, possibly most relevant to this particular bill, the "baseless claims" of election misconduct. All three of these claims were relentlessly censored and shamelessly enforced with threats of punishment, de-platforming, and de-banking for daring to speak of these issues. Yet, over time, clear, incontrovertible evidence emerged which supported these claims and proved them to be true."
"For hundreds of years, America has served as a beacon for the free flow of ideas and uncensored conversation. Citizens have the right to have open and honest conversations in the public square, which should include raising questions about election processes and outcomes. Arguably, these honest conversations have made our country stronger. If the concerns or "disinformation" are unfounded, the State Board of Election should focus their energy on releasing public statements proving these concerns are unfounded. They should treat the moment as an opportunity to re-commit themselves to transparency - not create opportunities for skepticism. HB0333 will do nothing to stop election disinformation. Instead, it only serves to attack those people who raise concerns rather than transparently address the concerns and put the skepticism to rest."
Vote NO on HB0333.
Kate Sullivan
Baltimore County
While Griffith, Roberts and several others on the recorded meeting were swiftly reassured that the bill would not infringe on legitimate questions about election administration or a citizen's right to legitimately question an election outcome, recent history informs us differently. Since 2020, citizens who have earnestly questioned election administration or the results of a given race are routinely labeled "election deniers." Some have even been labeled domestic terrorists.
In the past four years, Americans have experienced the censorship of speech by the federal government, conveniently laundered through its NGO and media partners. Accounts that didn't comply with certain "community standards" were removed. Legitimate concerns about issues like abortion, vaccines, or elections have and continue to be censored or suppressed.
According to the Movement Advancement Project, Maryland is not the only state that has moved to update its laws to guard against election-related disinformation. However, HB033 appears to be a more robust attempt to address the matter. Pennsylvania has big plans to beef up its efforts to combat these thought crimes. In February, Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro announced his plan to save us from ourselves by launching his Election Threats Task Force to "protect voters from intimidation and provide voters with accurate, trusted election information."
State Boards of Elections routinely state it is a conspiracy theory to state that voter rolls should be addressed or that machines are not connected to the internet, or that voter challenges suppress voters, evidence, facts, and data be damned. It is no wonder there is little confidence in the election universe that state boards will suddenly see the light and only investigate legitimate, clear-cut examples of fraud or election malfeasance.
