Between November 3, 2020, and January 6, 2021, attorneys affiliated with the Trump campaign and allied groups filed 62 lawsuits in state and federal courts alleging election fraud or irregularities. Of those cases, 61 were dismissed, withdrawn, or denied. This investigation documents what those lawsuits actually alleged, what evidence they presented, what judges found, and who financed the legal strategy that became known as 'Stop the Steal.'
Between November 3, 2020, and January 6, 2021, attorneys affiliated with the Trump campaign and allied organizations filed 62 lawsuits in state and federal courts across six battleground states. The legal strategy represented an unprecedented attempt to use the judicial system to overturn a presidential election. Of those 62 cases, 61 were dismissed, withdrawn, or denied. The one exception was a Pennsylvania state court decision that allowed poll observers to stand six feet instead of fifteen feet from ballot counting tables—a procedural adjustment that had no impact on vote counts or certification.
This investigation documents what those lawsuits actually alleged, what evidence they presented to courts, what judges found, and the financial and organizational infrastructure that supported the litigation campaign that became known as "Stop the Steal."
The lawsuits fell into several categories: challenges to state election procedures and rule changes, allegations of specific fraud or irregularities in vote counting, claims about voting machine manipulation, and constitutional challenges to how states administered elections. Each category presented different legal theories, different evidence standards, and different procedural hurdles. Understanding what courts actually ruled—and why—requires examining the cases in detail rather than in aggregate.
The Trump campaign's direct litigation focused primarily on procedural challenges. In Pennsylvania, the campaign's federal lawsuit argued that different counties used different standards for notifying voters about defective mail-in ballots and allowing them to "cure" defects. The suit claimed this violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and sought to prevent certification of Pennsylvania's election results. The campaign did not allege that any ballots were fraudulent, only that inconsistent procedures created unfairness.
In Michigan, the campaign filed a lawsuit seeking to halt vote certification in Wayne County (which includes Detroit), alleging that poll challengers were denied meaningful access to observe ballot counting and that election officials failed to properly verify mail-in ballot signatures. The suit presented affidavits from Republican poll challengers describing being kept too far from counting tables to observe clearly and witnessing what they considered suspicious activity.
"Charges of unfairness are serious. But calling an election unfair does not make it so. Charges require specific allegations and then proof. We have neither here."
Judge Stephanos Bibas (Trump appointee) — Third Circuit Court of Appeals, November 27, 2020Sidney Powell's "Kraken" lawsuits made far more sweeping allegations. Filed in Michigan, Georgia, Arizona, and Wisconsin between November 25-30, her complaints alleged an international conspiracy involving Dominion Voting Systems, Venezuelan and Chinese interests, the CIA, and domestic actors. The suits claimed Dominion machines were designed to enable vote manipulation, that algorithms switched votes from Trump to Biden, and that this fraud was mathematically provable through statistical analysis.
The Amistad Project, representing a conservative legal organization, filed cases arguing that changes to election procedures—particularly expansion of mail voting and drop boxes—violated state constitutions because legislatures, not governors or election officials, have constitutional authority over election rules. These suits sought to invalidate large numbers of mail-in ballots based on procedural grounds rather than alleging fraud.
The Trump campaign's Pennsylvania federal case included declarations from poll watchers and statistical analyses. Judge Matthew Brann examined these materials and found them insufficient. He noted that the campaign withdrew fraud allegations before the hearing, reducing the case to a procedural equal protection claim. The statistical analyses, he found, did not prove votes were fraudulent or miscounted, only that different counties had different cure rates for defective ballots—differences the campaign attributed to Democratic counties being more permissive.
In his November 21, 2020 opinion dismissing the case, Brann wrote that the campaign presented "strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations" unsupported by evidence. He compared the lawsuit to "Frankenstein's Monster" that had been "haphazardly stitched together." The campaign appealed to the Third Circuit, where a unanimous three-judge panel including Trump-appointed Judge Stephanos Bibas affirmed the dismissal on November 27.
Sidney Powell's Kraken lawsuits presented hundreds of pages of affidavits and expert reports. Judges who examined these materials found them fundamentally flawed. In Michigan, Judge Linda Parker's August 2021 sanctions opinion detailed specific problems: affidavits based on misunderstanding of election procedures, mathematical analyses containing errors that invalidated their conclusions, and claims about voting machines that contradicted technical specifications and audit results.
One widely-cited declaration from a cybersecurity expert claimed to identify statistically impossible vote patterns in Michigan. Parker's analysis showed the expert had used data from Minnesota counties, not Michigan, making the entire analysis irrelevant to the case. Another affidavit from a supposed election expert in Venezuela turned out to be based largely on a Wikipedia article and contained demonstrably false claims about Dominion's corporate history.
The 86 judges who heard election cases represented a diverse judicial background. Many were Republican appointees; several were Trump appointees. Their rulings were remarkably consistent across different courts and different legal theories. The most common grounds for dismissal were lack of standing, failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted, lack of evidence, laches (filing too late), and mootness.
The U.S. Supreme Court's rejection of Texas v. Pennsylvania on December 11, 2020 was particularly significant. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, supported by 17 other Republican-led states and 126 House Republicans, asked the Court to invalidate election results in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Georgia based on claims those states violated the Constitution by changing election procedures without legislative approval. The Court denied the motion for lack of standing, ruling that Texas had "not demonstrated a judicially cognizable interest in the manner in which another State conducts its elections."
Justice Alito and Justice Thomas issued a brief statement saying they would have allowed Texas to file the case but "would not grant other relief"—meaning they would not have ruled in Texas's favor even if they heard the case. No other justices, including the three Trump appointees, indicated support for granting any relief.
Among the most consequential aspects of the Stop the Steal litigation campaign was what happened to individual election workers targeted by fraud allegations. Ruby Freeman and her daughter Shaye Moss, election workers in Fulton County, Georgia, became central figures in conspiracy theories after surveillance footage from State Farm Arena on election night showed them counting ballots.
Rudy Giuliani, testifying before the Georgia state legislature on December 3, 2020, played the video and claimed it showed Freeman and Moss pulling "suitcases" of fraudulent ballots from under a table after observers and media had left, then scanning the same ballots multiple times. The claims spread rapidly through conservative media and social media platforms.
Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger's office investigated the claims within days and found them completely false. The containers were standard ballot bins, not suitcases. Observers and media had not been told to leave; they left voluntarily when they believed counting was done for the night. Surveillance video showed the bins being placed under the table in plain view earlier in the day. No ballots were scanned multiple times—each ballot was scanned once, as shown by audit logs from the scanning machines.
Gabriel Sterling, a Republican and Georgia's voting system implementation manager, held a press conference on December 4 specifically debunking the claims. The FBI investigated. The Georgia Bureau of Investigation reviewed the evidence. Independent auditors examined the machine logs. Every investigation reached the same conclusion: no fraud occurred.
Despite these findings, Trump mentioned Freeman by name 18 times during his January 2, 2021 phone call with Raffensperger, calling her "a professional vote scammer and hustler." Freeman and Moss received death threats, racist messages, and harassment that forced Freeman to leave her home for two months. People showed up at Freeman's house attempting to make "citizen's arrests."
In their defamation lawsuit against Giuliani, Freeman and Moss presented evidence of the campaign of vilification and its effects on their lives. In December 2023, a federal jury deliberated for approximately ten hours before awarding them $148 million in damages. Giuliani, who had already been found liable by default for refusing to comply with discovery, filed for bankruptcy shortly after the verdict.
Dominion Voting Systems became the primary target of the most sweeping fraud allegations. The company, founded in Canada in 2002 and headquartered in Denver, provided voting equipment used in 28 states during 2020. Claims about Dominion machines formed the centerpiece of Sidney Powell's Kraken lawsuits and were promoted extensively by Trump attorneys, conservative media figures, and the former president himself.
The core allegations were that Dominion machines were designed to enable fraud, that they were created in Venezuela to rig elections for Hugo Chavez, that they used algorithms to switch votes from Trump to Biden, and that votes were transmitted over the internet to servers in Germany where they were manipulated. None of these claims proved true.
Dominion was not founded in Venezuela—it was founded in Toronto in 2002, three years into Chavez's presidency. The company's Venezuelan connection amounted to supplying some voting machines to that country years after its founding. Dominion machines do not connect to the internet during vote counting—they are air-gapped systems. Multiple audits, including hand recounts in Georgia and forensic examinations in Michigan, found no evidence of vote switching. The algorithms used to scan and count ballots are standard optical character recognition software, not mechanisms for fraud.
"The most secure election in American history. There is no evidence that any voting system deleted or lost votes, changed votes, or was in any way compromised."
Joint Statement — CISA and Election Infrastructure Coordinating Councils, November 12, 2020Dominion filed defamation lawsuits seeking billions in damages against Sidney Powell, Rudy Giuliani, Mike Lindell, Fox News, Newsmax, and One America News Network. The company's legal strategy focused on demonstrating that defendants either knew the claims were false or acted with reckless disregard for the truth—the actual malice standard required for defamation of a public figure.
The Fox News case revealed internal communications showing hosts and executives privately expressing doubts about fraud claims while promoting them on air. Text messages obtained during discovery showed Tucker Carlson calling Powell's claims "insane" and "unbelievably offensive" in private while his show featured her allegations. In April 2023, Fox settled with Dominion for $787.5 million, the largest known media defamation settlement in U.S. history, just as the trial was about to begin.
Cases against Powell and Giuliani proceeded. Both defendants struggled to mount effective defenses after discovery revealed they had made claims without verification, relied on sources they had not vetted, and continued promoting theories after being informed they were false. As of March 2024, Dominion's lawsuits seeking over $1.3 billion from each remained in litigation.
At least twelve attorneys faced professional sanctions, disciplinary proceedings, or disbarment related to election litigation. The consequences ranged from formal reprimands to loss of law licenses.
Judge Linda Parker's August 2021 sanctions opinion in the Michigan Kraken case ordered Sidney Powell, Lin Wood, and seven other attorneys to pay $175,000 in legal fees and undergo continuing legal education. Parker wrote that the attorneys "scorned their oath" and that the case "was never about fraud—it was about undermining the People's faith in our democracy and debasing the judicial process to do so." She referred all nine attorneys to their state bars for disciplinary investigation.
Rudy Giuliani's law license was suspended in New York in June 2021 and in Washington D.C. in July 2021. The New York Appellate Division found he made "demonstrably false and misleading statements" about the election to courts, lawmakers, and the public. In July 2024, a New York court disbarred Giuliani permanently, finding he had "flagrantly misused" his position and "openly and unabashedly" promoted false narratives.
Jenna Ellis received a public censure from Colorado regulators in March 2022 for making ten misrepresentations about the election. John Eastman, who authored legal memos claiming Vice President Pence could refuse to certify electoral votes, was disbarred in California in March 2024. The California State Bar Court found he made false statements and engaged in "exceptionally serious" ethical violations.
Lin Wood relinquished his Georgia law license in July 2023 rather than face a disciplinary hearing about his conduct. Jeffrey Clark, a Department of Justice official who drafted a letter for Trump to send to Georgia officials falsely claiming DOJ had identified significant concerns about the election, faced D.C. Bar disciplinary proceedings that remained pending as of early 2024.
The Stop the Steal litigation campaign required substantial funding. The Trump campaign spent $8.8 million on election-related litigation according to Federal Election Commission filings analyzed by the Campaign Finance Institute. This figure covered only direct campaign expenditures and did not include spending by allied organizations.
Jones Day, a major law firm that had represented the Trump campaign during the election, withdrew from post-election litigation on November 13, 2020, after receiving $2.3 million in fees. The firm's withdrawal meant the campaign needed to find new attorneys willing to pursue increasingly dubious claims. This led to the elevation of Giuliani and the involvement of Sidney Powell, Lin Wood, and smaller firms willing to take the cases.
Allied organizations raised additional funds. The Constitutional Defense Fund, associated with what became the America First Policy Institute, raised approximately $2.7 million in November and December 2020 through small-donor appeals claiming the money would "defend election integrity" and "stop the steal." The Amistad Project of the Thomas More Society saw its parent organization's revenue increase from $3.2 million in 2019 to $11.3 million in 2020, with significant donations coming after the election.
Questions arose about whether fundraising appeals constituted fraud when virtually all cases were dismissed and the stated purpose of overturning election results was never achieved. Critics pointed to solicitations promising donations would fund specific legal challenges, then directing money to other purposes or administrative overhead. The organizations defended their fundraising as legitimate support for legal representation regardless of outcome.
Multiple government entities investigated election fraud claims. The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), working with election officials from both parties, concluded on November 12, 2020 that the election was "the most secure in American history" and that "there is no evidence that any voting system deleted or lost votes, changed votes, or was in any way compromised."
CISA Director Christopher Krebs, a Trump appointee, defended this assessment publicly. Trump fired him via Twitter on November 17, calling the statement "highly inaccurate." Krebs later testified before Congress and explained that CISA's conclusion was based on monitoring of election infrastructure, analysis of reported incidents, and collaboration with state and local officials who conducted the actual vote counting.
The Department of Justice investigated fraud allegations. Attorney General William Barr authorized U.S. Attorneys to pursue substantial claims before certification, breaking with standard DOJ protocol. This authorization led to the resignation of the Justice Department's top election crimes prosecutor, Richard Pilger, who argued it contradicted longstanding policy.
Despite this authorization, investigations found no evidence of fraud on a scale that could affect the outcome. Barr announced this publicly on December 1, 2020, stating: "To date, we have not seen fraud on a scale that could have effected a different outcome in the election." According to his later testimony to the January 6 Committee, Barr repeatedly told Trump that specific claims about Dominion machines, ballot dumps, and widespread fraud were "bullshit."
Recounts in contested states consistently confirmed original results with minor variations normal for any recount. Georgia conducted three counts: the original machine count, a hand recount of all 5 million ballots, and a second machine recount. The hand recount found a net change of 496 votes, reducing Biden's margin from 12,670 to 12,174—well within the margin that would trigger automatic scrutiny but far from overturning the result.
Wisconsin's partial recount, requested and paid for by the Trump campaign in Milwaukee and Dane Counties (the state's two largest Democratic counties), resulted in Biden gaining 87 votes. The recount cost the Trump campaign $3 million and increased Biden's statewide margin from 20,682 to 20,769 votes.
Michigan's Antrim County, where initial reporting errors showed Biden winning a heavily Republican county (later corrected to show Trump won), became a focus of fraud claims. A forensic audit of Dominion machines found the errors resulted from human mistakes in ballot programming and reporting, not machine manipulation. A hand recount of Antrim County ballots confirmed the corrected totals.
Arizona's Republican-controlled state Senate commissioned an unusual audit of Maricopa County conducted by Cyber Ninjas, a Florida firm with no election auditing experience. After five months, $5.7 million in costs, and methods criticized by election security experts, the audit found Biden won Maricopa County by 360 votes more than the official count—increasing his margin rather than reducing it.
The Stop the Steal litigation campaign failed to overturn the 2020 election result, but its effects extended beyond the courtroom. According to polls conducted throughout 2021-2023, significant percentages of Republican voters continued to believe the election was fraudulent despite the legal outcomes. This sustained belief influenced state legislation, candidate selection, and election administration policies.
Between January 2021 and December 2023, at least 19 states enacted laws changing election procedures, with sponsors citing election integrity concerns raised during the 2020 litigation. These laws included stricter voter ID requirements, limitations on mail voting, reduced drop box availability, and changes to election official authority. Proponents argued the laws responded to legitimate concerns about election security; opponents argued they made voting more difficult without addressing any actual fraud.
The litigation also affected the legal profession's norms around election cases. Courts became more explicit about sanctioning attorneys who filed claims without adequate factual investigation. Several judges wrote extensively about the responsibility of attorneys to verify claims before filing, particularly in election cases where false allegations could undermine democratic processes.
"This case was never about fraud—it was about undermining the People's faith in our democracy and debasing the judicial process to do so."
Judge Linda Parker — Sanctions Order, King v. Whitmer, August 25, 2021For the individual election workers like Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss, the consequences were personal and severe. Their testimony before the January 6 Committee in June 2022 described death threats, harassment, and the complete disruption of their lives. Freeman testified that she no longer introduces herself by her name and still does not feel safe in public. The $148 million jury verdict in their favor sent a message about the costs of false accusations, though whether Giuliani will be able to pay remains uncertain given his bankruptcy filing.
The broader question of how democracies handle disputed elections remains unresolved. The 62 lawsuits demonstrated both the strength and limitations of judicial processes. Courts successfully rejected meritless claims while providing a forum for allegations to be heard and examined. But court victories did not settle the matter in public opinion, raising questions about what role courts can play when political disputes are framed as legal claims.
The documentary record of the Stop the Steal litigation is extensive and clear. Sixty-two lawsuits were filed. Eighty-six judges reviewed them. Sixty-one cases were dismissed, withdrawn, or denied. The judges included Republican appointees, Democratic appointees, and Trump appointees. None found evidence of fraud sufficient to change the election outcome. Multiple recounts confirmed original results. Government investigations by CISA, the Department of Justice, the FBI, and state agencies found no evidence supporting the fraud claims.
Attorneys who filed the most aggressive cases faced sanctions, disciplinary proceedings, and in several instances lost their law licenses. The companies and individuals defamed by false fraud allegations won substantial damages in court—$787.5 million from Fox News to Dominion, $148 million from Giuliani to Freeman and Moss, with additional cases ongoing.
This does not mean every aspect of the 2020 election was perfect or that no legitimate questions exist about election administration. Courts acknowledged that some procedural inconsistencies occurred, that some rule changes were made close to the election, and that some aspects of expanded mail voting presented administrative challenges. But courts consistently distinguished between procedural imperfections and fraud, between administrative challenges and conspiracy, between losing an election and having it stolen.
The architecture of the Big Lie was built on this conflation—taking real administrative challenges and procedural variations that occur in every election and characterizing them as evidence of systemic fraud. The court system, despite its limitations, successfully separated these claims and demanded evidence. When evidence was not provided, or when the evidence presented was shown to be flawed, courts dismissed the cases. The legal record is clear. Whether that clarity affects political narratives remains a different question.