52 U.S.C. § 21112

Establishment of State-based administrative complaint procedures to remedy grievances

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 52 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Establishment of State-based administrative complaint procedures to remedy grievances(1) Establishment of procedures as condition of receiving funds

If a State receives any payment under a program under this chapter, the State shall be required to establish and maintain State-based administrative complaint procedures which meet the requirements of paragraph (2).

(2) Requirements for proceduresThe requirements of this paragraph are as follows:(A) The procedures shall be uniform and nondiscriminatory.(B) Under the procedures, any person who believes that there is a violation of any provision of subchapter III (including a violation which has occurred, is occurring, or is about to occur) may file a complaint.(C) Any complaint filed under the procedures shall be in writing and notarized, and signed and sworn by the person filing the complaint.(D) The State may consolidate complaints filed under subparagraph (B).(E) At the request of the complainant, there shall be a hearing on the record.(F) If, under the procedures, the State determines that there is a violation of any provision of subchapter III, the State shall provide the appropriate remedy.(G) If, under the procedures, the State determines that there is no violation, the State shall dismiss the complaint and publish the results of the procedures.(H) The State shall make a final determination with respect to a complaint prior to the expiration of the 90-day period which begins on the date the complaint is filed, unless the complainant consents to a longer period for making such a determination.(I) If the State fails to meet the deadline applicable under subparagraph (H), the complaint shall be resolved within 60 days under alternative dispute resolution procedures established for purposes of this section. The record and other materials from any proceedings conducted under the complaint procedures established under this section shall be made available for use under the alternative dispute resolution procedures.(b) Requiring Attorney General approval of compliance plan for States not receiving funds(1) In generalNot later than January 1, 2004, each nonparticipating State shall elect—(A) to certify to the Commission that the State meets the requirements of subsection (a) in the same manner as a State receiving a payment under this chapter; or(B) to submit a compliance plan to the Attorney General which provides detailed information on the steps the State will take to ensure that it meets the requirements of subchapter III.(2) States without approved plan deemed out of compliance

A nonparticipating State (other than a State which makes the election described in paragraph (1)(A)) shall be deemed to not meet the requirements of subchapter III if the Attorney General has not approved a compliance plan submitted by the State under this subsection.

(3) Nonparticipating State defined

In this section, a “nonparticipating State” is a State which, during 2003, does not notify any office which is responsible for making payments to States under any program under this chapter of its intent to participate in, and receive funds under, the program.

(Pub. L. 107–252, title IV, § 402, Oct. 29, 2002, 116 Stat. 1715.)Editorial NotesReferences in Text

This chapter, referred to in subsecs. (a)(1) and (b)(1)(A), (3), was in the original “this Act”, meaning Pub. L. 107–252, Oct. 29, 2002, 116 Stat. 1666, known as the Help America Vote Act of 2002, which is classified principally to this chapter. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Tables.

Subchapter III, referred to in subsecs. (a)(2)(B), (F) and (b)(1)(B), (2), was in the original “title III”, meaning title III of Pub. L. 107–252, Oct. 29, 2002, 116 Stat. 1704, which is classified principally to subchapter III (§ 21081 et seq.) of this chapter. For complete classification of title III to the Code, see Tables.

Codification

Section was formerly classified to section 15512 of Title 42, The Public Health and Welfare, prior to editorial reclassification and renumbering as this section.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 12 cases (9 in the last 5 years), 2016–2026 · leading case: Colon-Marrero v. Garcia-Velez, 813 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2016).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Colon-Marrero v. Garcia-Velez, 813 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2016). “52 U.S.C. § 21112 (a)(2)(B). If the state determines that a violation occurred, it must "provide the appropriate remedy.”

Wisconsin Voter All. v. Don M. Millis (7th Cir. 2026). · cites it 5× “” 52 U.S.C. § 21112 (a)(1). “Any person who believes that there is a viola- tion” of HAVA “may ﬁle a complaint” with an authorized state agency.”

Linn Cnty. Auditor Joe Miller v. Iowa Voter Reg. Comm'n (Iowa 2024). · cites it 4× “The plaintiffs instead went to federal court, alleging that “the WEC’s conduct related to the 2022 and 2023 administrative complaints violated Plaintiffs’ right to an administrative complaint process, a hearing on the record, 11 and an appropriate remedy under 52 U.S.C. § 21112…”

PA Fair Elections v. PA DOS, Sec'y. of the Com. A. Schmidt (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2025). · cites it 3× “” Section 5 402(a)(2)(F) of HAVA, 52 U.S.C. § 21112 (a)(2)(F). Petitioners assert that, as the codified version of Pennsylvania’s HAVA administrative procedure states, the OGC shall issue a final determination and remedial plan if necessary.”

Wisconsin Voter All. v. Millis (E.D. Wis. 2024). · cites it 2× “They maintain that the WEC’s conduct related to the 2022 and 2023 administrative complaints violated Plaintiffs’ right to an administrative complaint process, a hearing on the record, and an appropriate remedy under 52 U.S.C. § 21112 . Id. ¶¶ 39, 43 . Plaintiffs also allege that…”

Kramer (W.D. Mo. 2026). · cites it 2× “52 U.S.C. §21112 (a)(2) (emphasis added).”

Iowa Voter All. v. Black Hawk Cnty. (N.D. Iowa 2020). “This is a different provision from the one at issue here but nothing in 52 U.S.C. § 21112 suggests a different conclusion.”

Minnesota Voters All. v. City of Minneapolis (D. Minnesota 2020). “The fact that HAVA requires states to create an administrative procedure to allow filing of HAVA complaints that provides the “appropriate remedy” if the state determines that there was a violation, 52 U.S.C. § 21112 (a), and that Plaintiffs consider Minnesota’s procedure to be…”

Wisconsin Voter All. v. Millis (E.D. Wis. 2025). “It was [Brown]’s understanding the Commission had to make a decision, but he did not get a decision, which concerns him because he will file HAVA complaints in the future.”

Pamela L. Bickford v. State of Alaska, Div. of Elections (Alaska 2025). “§§ 20901-21145 ; see 52 U.S.C. § 21112 for the requirements for state-based administrative complaint procedures.”

D. McLinko v. Com., DOS & Al Schmidt, Sec'y of State (OGC) (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2025). “2, as required by Section 402 of HAVA, 52 U.S.C. § 21112 (requiring the establishment and maintenance of “State-based administrative complaint procedures”).”

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.