Minn. Stat. » CHAPTER 204B. ELECTION ADMINISTRATION; GENERAL PROVISIONS
Minnesota Statutes

Minn. Stat. § 204B.47 (2026)

Alternative Election Procedures; Duties Of Secretary Of State

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MN-REVrevisor.mn.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

When a provision of the Minnesota Election Law cannot be implemented as a result of an order of a state or federal court, the secretary of state shall adopt alternative election procedures to permit the administration of any election affected by the order. The procedures may include the voting and handling of ballots cast after 8:00 p.m. as a result of a state or federal court order or any other order extending the time established by law for closing the polls. The alternative election procedures remain in effect until the first day of July following the next succeeding final adjournment of the legislature, unless otherwise provided by law or by court order.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 2008–2020 · leading case: James Carson v. Steve Simon, 978 F.3d 1051 (8th Cir. 2020).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
James Carson v. Steve Simon, 978 F.3d 1051 (8th Cir. 2020). · cites it 4× “Minn. Stat. § 204B.47. This statute allows the Secretary to “adopt alternative election procedures[,]” but only “[w]hen a provision of the Minnesota Election Law cannot be implemented as a result of an order of a state or federal court[.”
Clark v. Pawlenty, 755 N.W.2d 293 (Minn. 2008). · cites it 2× “” Minn.Stat. § 204B.47 (2006). Although the Secretary of State correctly points out that he is not directly responsible for the printing and preparation of ballots, when, as here, a ballot challenge under Minn.”
James Carson v. Steve Simon (8th Cir. 2020). · cites it 4× “Minn. Stat. § 204B.47. This statute allows the Secretary to “adopt alternative election procedures[,]” but only “[w]hen a provision of the Minnesota Election Law cannot be implemented as a result of an order of a state or federal court[.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.