Delivers Unanimous Verdict on Election Transparency

On April 28, 2026 the Pennsylvania Supreme Court issued a ruling that has election integrity supporters cheering. In an unanimous decision, the court reversed a Commonwealth Court order on the matter of public accessibility to certain election records.

The case of Honey v. Lycoming County Offices of Voter Services stems from a Right to Know (RTK) request submitted by Heather Honey in October 2021. Four and a half years later, will she finally get her answers?

Background

The 2020 Presidential election was riddled with irregularities in Pennsylvania. There was the truck loaded with pallets of ballots that disappeared. Also, there was a huge influx of mail-in ballots due to government-imposed COVID restrictions. There were discrepancies between the total votes cast and the total votes reported in the state. Many people went searching for answers to their election questions about these irregularities and others.

When Allegheny County (Pittsburgh) released the Cast Vote Records (CVR) for the 2020 General Election in response to a RTK request, others sought the same information for additional counties.

The CVR is essentially a spreadsheet that lists the scanned results for each position and candidate on the ballots. Each line provides the details for a single scanned ballot. The ballots are listed on the report in a randomized order to protect the privacy of the electors.

Heather Honey’s RTK, submitted to Lycoming County in October 2021, requested digital copies of the CVR file for every precinct and central tabulator used in the 2020 General Election. Lycoming County Voter Services denied Ms. Honey’s request stating that the CVR was not a public record as it was “contents of the ballot box,” which must be safeguarded to protect the privacy of each voter’s ballot.

A series of appeals ensued. The Lycoming County Court of Common Pleas agreed with Ms. Honey that these records were public and should be released. The county appealed that ruling to the Commonwealth Court, which reversed the lower court’s decision, siding with the county on the non-public nature of the documents. The PA Supreme Court accepted Ms. Honey’s appeal on October 7, 2024 and heard oral arguments on May 30, 2025.

Ruling

The main election question before the PA Supreme Court was if the CVR was considered the contents of the ballot box. Justices weighed the public’s need to confirm that “our elections are safe, secure, and accurate” with the individual voter’s State Constitutional right to maintaining the secret ballot.

Before the court could answer the central question, there was a lengthy examination of definitions of voting machines, ballot boxes, and electronic voting systems. The Election Code was first enacted in 1937 with amendments being made throughout the decades. When electronic voting systems were added to the code in 1980, no modification was made to Article IX that governed voting machines. Since election equipment, i.e. machines, boxes, etc., were never defined by the legislature in the Election Code, interpretations varied among the PA Department of State, counties, and lower courts.

The PA Supreme Court provided their interpretation of the law with respect to the definitions of election equipment, etc. This will stand as clarification for all in the state until such time as the legislature makes additional changes in the Election Code.

Finally, the PA Supreme Court ruled that the CVR is not the contents of the ballot box or a voting machine, but a report produced by an electronic voting system. As such, the Election Code requires public disclosure of all reports held by the county Voter Services. Cast vote records are public information.

What’s Next

On the May 1, 2026 episode of The Conservative Voice, Ms. Honey’s attorney, Thomas W. King, III, Esq., discussed the importance of this case to ensuring secure elections in the future.

Although the CVR case is a big win, there are several other election document RTK cases still to be settled where voted ballot images, mail-in ballot envelopes, and voter registration forms have all been requested.

Probably first in line with the PA Supreme Court is Previte v. Erie County Board of Elections. The issue here? Ballot images – pictures taken by tabulators of every ballot cast in a precinct or central tabulation center. The PA Commonwealth Court ruled unanimously on July 31, 2024 that ballot images are public records and must be disclosed under the RTK Law. Although Erie County appealed the ruling, the case was put on hold by the Supreme Court purportedly in abeyance until the Honey case was decided.

If the Supreme Court upholds the Commonwealth Court’s ruling in Previte, then the public will be able to compare ballot images to the CVR to verify that the reported results match those records. It’s one more piece of the puzzle to help give voters election confidence or find a fatal flaw in the election systems.

Bottom line…

The public won with the PA Supreme Court decision on Cast Vote Records. We should be grateful there are citizens and attorneys willing to engage with agencies and the commonwealth for election transparency. But why is there even a battle over the transparency of public records? Shouldn’t the PA Department of State and the leaders in the counties of this commonwealth want to ease the minds of citizens about processes, equipment, etc. relating to our elections? It seems that PA leaders continue to fight transparency up to the highest court. They have no reason not to appeal every decision. Money is no object. More tax dollars will cover the cost of the next lawsuit. If there is nothing to hide, then why do they fight so hard to protect public records from being disclosed? Perhaps one day we will know.