Far-Right Operatives Face Trial for Racially Charged Robocalls Targeting Black Voters in 2020 Michigan Election
The Michigan Court of Appeals has upheld criminal charges against two far-right operatives, Jack Burkman and Jacob Wohl, accused of orchestrating a series of robocalls aimed at suppressing Black voter turnout during the 2020 presidential election. The calls, totaling approximately 85,000, disseminated misinformation about mail-in voting, specifically targeting Black communities in Detroit and other Midwestern states. This legal battle, initiated in 2020 by Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel, has traversed through various courts, culminating in this recent appellate court decision affirming the charges against Burkman and Wohl.
The case centers on allegations that the robocalls, disguised as public service announcements, contained a barrage of false claims about the consequences of voting by mail. These included assertions that personal information gleaned from mail-in ballots would be used by law enforcement to pursue outstanding warrants, by creditors to collect debts, and potentially by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to enforce mandatory vaccinations. The calls specifically targeted “Black neighborhoods,” stoking fears and aiming to dissuade voters from participating in the election. Prosecutors allege that Burkman and Wohl intended to "hi-jack this boring election" by exploiting racial anxieties and undermining trust in the electoral process.
The complex legal journey of this case began with initial charges filed by Attorney General Nessel in 2020. The case then progressed to the Michigan Supreme Court, which, in November 2023, directed the Court of Appeals to determine whether the robocalls violated state election laws, specifically a provision prohibiting influencing or deterring voters through "corrupt means." The Michigan Supreme Court, in June 2024, further affirmed that the defendants’ actions were driven by “racially based motives” and an intent to deter Black voters through “immoral or depraved” methods. This paved the way for the Court of Appeals to analyze the specifics of the Michigan election law in relation to the defendants’ actions.
The Michigan Court of Appeals ultimately ruled that the robocalls did indeed violate state law by disseminating misinformation about a specific voting procedure—mail-in voting—with the intent to deter voters. The court’s opinion, authored by Judge Anica Letica, emphasized that the robocalls directly targeted a voting method, making false claims about its consequences. This direct link between the misinformation and the act of voting by mail satisfied the legal requirement of interfering with a voting "procedure." The court’s decision effectively cements the criminal charges against Burkman and Wohl, bringing them closer to trial.
However, the Court of Appeals’ ruling was not unanimous. Judge James Redford dissented, arguing that the robocalls did not address voting requirements or procedures, but rather focused on potential negative consequences of voting absentee. He contended that the court failed to fully address the Michigan Supreme Court’s instructions to examine whether the calls specifically interfered with the process of voting. This dissenting opinion highlights the complex legal interpretations at play in this case.
The Michigan Attorney General’s office lauded the court’s decision. Attorney General Nessel emphasized the importance of protecting the right to vote and condemned voter intimidation tactics. She expressed satisfaction that the Court of Appeals recognized the robocalls as a deliberate misrepresentation of voting procedures designed to suppress voter participation. The case moves forward to trial, where the defendants will face the consequences of their alleged actions. This legal battle is a significant development in the ongoing effort to combat voter suppression and misinformation, particularly in marginalized communities. The eventual outcome will set a precedent for future cases involving attempts to manipulate elections and undermine democratic processes.
