The Fight for Election Integrity in Rockland County
A Small County’s Big Battle to Verify the 2024 Vote
By Apirate Monk
In the quiet suburban sprawl of Rockland County, New York, a stone’s throw from the bustle of Manhattan, a legal drama is unfolding that could ripple far beyond its borders. At the heart of this story is a lawsuit challenging the accuracy of the 2024 presidential and U.S. Senate election results—a case that has thrust a small, nonpartisan organization called SMART Legislation into the national spotlight. Led by Lulu Friesdat, a journalist-turned-election-reform-advocate, the group is pushing for a full hand recount of the county’s ballots, citing statistical anomalies and sworn voter affidavits that suggest something went awry on Election Day. As the case moves into the discovery phase, it raises profound questions about the integrity of America’s electoral process, the fragility of public trust, and the lengths to which citizens must go to ensure their votes are counted accurately.
The Spark of Suspicion
Lulu Friesdat is no stranger to controversy. A former documentary filmmaker and TEDx speaker, she has spent years investigating the mechanics of American elections. Her organization, SMART Elections, and its action arm, SMART Legislation, emerged from a belief that the systems underpinning democracy—voting machines, tabulation processes, and certification protocols—are not as infallible as many assume. “Elections are the foundation of our democracy,” Friesdat says, her voice steady but urgent. “If we can’t trust the results, we’re on shaky ground.”
The 2024 election, like its predecessors in 2020 and 2016, was fraught with tension. National discourse was saturated with claims of voter fraud, machine malfunctions, and irregularities, though most allegations lacked the concrete evidence needed to overturn results. In Rockland County, however, Friesdat and her team believe they have found something tangible. Their lawsuit, filed in the New York Supreme Court, points to two key issues: discrepancies in the U.S. Senate race and statistical anomalies in the presidential vote that defy easy explanation.
The Senate race irregularities center on independent candidate Diane Sare. According to sworn affidavits from voters in Rockland County’s District 39 and District 62, more people claim to have voted for Sare than the official tallies reflect. In District 39, nine voters signed statements asserting they cast ballots for Sare, yet the Rockland County Board of Elections recorded only five votes—a nearly 50 percent shortfall. In District 62, five voters said they voted for Sare, but only three votes were counted, a 40 percent deficit. These discrepancies, while small in raw numbers, are significant in a county where every vote is supposed to count.
The presidential race raises even more eyebrows. SMART Legislation’s analysis, backed by Max Bonamente, a physicist and statistician from the University of Alabama in Huntsville, highlights what they call “statistically highly unlikely” results in four of Rockland County’s five towns when compared to 2020 election data. One particularly striking anomaly involves precincts where hundreds of voters chose Democratic Senate candidate Kirsten Gillibrand but recorded zero votes for Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris. “This isn’t just unusual—it’s mathematically bizarre,” Bonamente says in an upcoming paper. “These data would require extreme sociological or political causes for their explanation.”
The Drop-Off Dilemma
Central to the lawsuit is a phenomenon known as “drop-off”—the difference in vote totals between a presidential candidate and a major down-ballot candidate from the same party. In a typical election, drop-off rates hover around 1 to 2 percent, reflecting voters who might skip a down-ballot race or split their ticket. In Rockland County, however, the 2024 election produced staggering disparities. Republican drop-off was 23 percent, meaning President-elect Donald Trump received 23 percent more votes than the Republican Senate candidate. On the Democratic side, the drop-off was negative 9 percent, indicating that Kamala Harris received fewer votes than Gillibrand—a rare and perplexing outcome.
“Negative drop-off is almost unheard of,” Friesdat explains. “It suggests that votes for Harris might not have been counted properly, or at all.” The scale of these gaps, especially in swing states like New York, has fueled speculation about potential errors in vote tabulation, whether due to human error, machine malfunctions, or something more sinister. Friesdat is careful not to leap to conclusions about fraud, emphasizing that the purpose of the lawsuit is to uncover the truth through a transparent, court-ordered hand recount. “We’re not saying we know what happened,” she says. “We’re saying we need to find out.”
The lawsuit’s advancement to the discovery phase, ordered by Judge Rachel Tanguay on May 22, 2025, marks a significant step. Discovery will allow SMART Legislation to examine voting records, depose election officials, and potentially access the voting machines themselves. For Friesdat, this is a chance to shine a light on a process that often operates in the shadows. “The public deserves to know how their votes are counted,” she says. “If there’s a problem, we need to fix it—not just for Rockland County, but for the whole country.”
A Broader Context of Doubt
Rockland County is not the first place to raise questions about election integrity. Historical examples provide a sobering backdrop. In Bladen County, North Carolina, statistical discrepancies in 2016 and 2018 led to the discovery of fraudulent absentee ballots. In Philadelphia, an election judge was caught committing fraud over multiple cycles, uncovered only because a local official noticed inconsistencies in the results. In Windham County, New Hampshire, a 2020 hand recount revealed that voting machines had miscounted ballots due to dust and folds in the paper—a mundane but consequential error.
These cases underscore a troubling reality: even small errors can erode trust in democracy. In a polarized era, where every election is scrutinized for signs of manipulation, the stakes are higher than ever. The 2024 election, in particular, was marked by intense skepticism. Posts on X and Reddit discussions reveal a public grappling with doubts about the electoral process. One X post from SMART Elections, dated May 30, 2025, notes that their press release about the Rockland County lawsuit reached an estimated 121 million people via AP wires, signaling widespread interest in the case.
Nationally, the 2024 election was closer than many expected. Despite claims of a “landslide” by Trump and his supporters, the popular vote margin was just 1.48 percent—the fourth smallest in the last century. This narrow gap, coupled with reports of irregularities in swing states, has kept the conversation about election integrity alive. On Reddit, users in communities like r/somethingiswrong2024 have debated everything from missing electoral college votes to allegations of voters being told they had already cast ballots. While many of these claims remain unverified, they reflect a broader unease about the systems that govern American elections.
The Human Element
At the heart of the Rockland County case are the voters themselves. The sworn affidavits from Districts 39 and 62 are not just legal documents; they are the voices of citizens who believe their votes were not counted. For Diane Sare, the independent Senate candidate, these discrepancies are personal. “Every vote matters,” she says in a statement on the SMART Elections website. “If even one person’s vote is ignored, it undermines the entire process.”
Friesdat’s own journey into election reform began with a similar sense of urgency. Her work as a journalist exposed her to stories of voting irregularities across the country, from malfunctioning machines to mismanaged recounts. “I kept seeing the same patterns,” she recalls. “Small errors that could have big consequences, and no one was doing anything about it.” Her transition from filmmaker to activist was driven by a belief that transparency is the antidote to distrust. SMART Elections’ mission—to make elections “secure, accurate, accessible, inclusive, well-administered, and publicly verifiable”—is rooted in this principle.
The organization’s work is not without critics. Some argue that lawsuits like the one in Rockland County risk fueling conspiracy theories or undermining confidence in elections without sufficient evidence. Others point out that the scale of the alleged discrepancies—dozens of votes in a single county—is unlikely to change the outcome of a national election. Friesdat counters that the issue is not just about numbers but about principle. “If we can’t get it right in one county, how can we trust the results anywhere?” she asks.
The Road Ahead
As the Rockland County case moves forward, it faces significant hurdles. The discovery process could take months, and a court-ordered recount is not guaranteed. Even if a recount is granted, it may not uncover definitive evidence of wrongdoing. Voting machines, paper ballots, and election records are notoriously complex, and errors can stem from a range of factors—human oversight, software glitches, or even physical damage to ballots, as seen in the Windham County case.
Yet the lawsuit’s implications extend beyond Rockland County. If SMART Legislation succeeds in proving that votes were miscounted, it could set a precedent for similar challenges nationwide. At a time when trust in institutions is at historic lows, such a victory could bolster calls for election reform, from mandatory hand recounts to stricter oversight of voting technology. Conversely, if the case falters, it may be dismissed as another quixotic quest in a long line of election disputes.
For now, Friesdat and her team are focused on the task at hand. They’ve raised over $50,000 since November 2024 to fund their efforts and are aiming to raise another $100,000 in the coming months. The support, she says, comes from ordinary citizens who share her belief in the importance of accurate elections. “This isn’t about one party or one candidate,” Friesdat emphasizes. “It’s about making sure every voice is heard.”
As the nation watches, Rockland County’s courthouse has become an unlikely battleground in the fight for democracy. Whether the lawsuit uncovers evidence of systemic flaws or simply reaffirms the integrity of the 2024 election, it serves as a reminder that the mechanisms of voting are only as strong as the people who demand they work. In an age of division, that demand may be the one thing Americans can still agree on.
Comments