A nonprofit government oversight group released an investigation, first seen by Breitbart News, which claimed that Janie Sitton, an attorney who appears to work on voter integrity at the Department of Justice (DOJ), allegedly gamed North Carolina’s election system during recent elections.
American Accountability Foundation (AAF) outlined in its memo that Sitton, who is originally from North Carolina, has allegedly worked off and on in the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division since the 1990s. The division she allegedly works in frequently takes cases regarding voting rights.
AAF also noted that she allegedly previously worked as an adjunct professor of law at William and Mary School of Law, teaching sexuality and the law. In fact, she allegedly wrote “Introduction to the Symposium, (De)Constructing Sex: Transgenderism, Intersexuality, Gender Identity and the Law” for the William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice, published in October 2000.
The memo alleged that records showed that Sitton had been a “resident” and “active voter” in Washington, DC, since August 13, 2010 — within days of buying her home on August 17 that year. It was also alleged that Sitton voted in five elections from 2012 to 2018 in Washington, DC, and at least once in North Carolina since 2020.
AAF noted in the memo that Sitton “claimed a homestead exemption on her D.C. residence every year from 2018 to Present,” according to records with the Washington Office of Tax and Revenue. The memo insists that in order to claim a homestead exemption in Washington, DC, owners must declare that the property is the principal residence.
Additionally, records found by AAF suggest that Sitton owns a condominium in North Carolina that she purchased in 2002. The oversight group further alleged that Sitton refinanced the mortgage on her condominium in April 2019, signing documents indicating it was a “Multistate Second Home Rider.” In fact, the property tax records also showed that the mailing address for the condominium had been her Washington, DC, home since 2011 — including the year she allegedly voted in the North Carolina election.
However, on August 19, 2020, Sitton allegedly registered to vote in North Carolina using the address of her “Second Home,” according to the state’s Board of Elections Voter Database. The data also showed that shortly after Sitton allegedly registered to vote in the state, she voted in the presidential General Election by absentee ballot in November 2020 and once more in a 2021 municipal election in November 2021.
The memo then noted that at the same time, Sitton allegedly “was claiming the homestead exemptions” in Washington, DC, while voting in North Carolina:
It is important to reiterate that while she was voting in the North Carolina elections, she was claiming the homestead exemptions on her “primary residence” in the District of Columbia and a little over a year prior had taken a mortgage on the North Carolina property contingent on her North Carolina property being a second non-residence property [emphasis added].
Furthermore, following her voting in North Carolina in 2020 and 2021, the D.C. Board of Elections allegedly showed that Sitton “abruptly” restored her voter registration in Washington, DC, as of May 2022.
With all of this, AAF pointed to North Carolina General Statutes 163-57, which define registration and voting in the state. AAF alleged that the statutes “clearly define what is and is not considered residency for the purposes of registering to vote within the state, with multiple provisions applying to Sitton’s situation.”
The statutes that AFF pointed to determine the residence of a person wanting to register to vote in the state:
(1) That place shall be considered the residence of a person in which that person’s habitation is fixed, and to which, whenever that person is absent, that person has the intention of returning;
…
(2) A person shall not be considered to have lost that person’s residence if that person leaves home and goes into another state, county, municipality, precinct, ward, or other election district of this State, for temporary purposes only, with the intention of returning.
(3) A person shall not be considered to have gained a residence in any county, municipality, precinct, ward, or other election district of this State, into which that person comes for temporary purposes only, without the intention of making that county, municipality, precinct, ward, or other election district a permanent place of abode;
(4) If a person removes to another state or county, municipality, precinct, ward, or other election district within this State, with the intention of making that state, county, municipality, precinct, ward, or other election district a permanent residence, that person shall be considered to have lost residence in the state, county, municipality, precinct, ward, or other election district from which that person has removed [emphasis added].
The memo argues that public records “make it clear” Sitton never had “the intention of making that county, municipality, precinct, ward, or other election district a permanent place of abode,” as required by North Carolina Law.
AAF alleges that Sitton “continuously claimed her D.C. home as a primary residence to obtain a homestead exemption on her property taxes while voting in another state;” “signed a mortgage agreement to keep her North Carolina condominium as a second non-residence property and not her primary residence;” “continued to have her North Carolina Property Tax bill sent to her D.C. address while claiming to live in North Carolina;” “continued to work at her job in the Voting Section of the Department of Justice, whose primary offices are in Washington D.C.;” and “voted by absentee ballot by mail in 2020.”
“It is important to note that Sitton is a highly experienced attorney working in the highest levels of the legal community in the United States, as [an] attorney at the United States Department of Justice,” the AAF memo added.
“Instances like this show how sophisticated election lawyers can game the system,” said former Ohio Secretary of State Ken Blackwell. “The idea that you can pretend to be a citizen of one place for years, then mentally declare yourself really to be a citizen of another state where you happen to own a second home, shows how easily voting laws can be leveraged by those who know how those laws are written.”
“We should hold ourselves to a higher standard,” Blackwell concluded.
The DOJ did not return Breitbart News’s request for comment.
Editorial note: This article has been updated.
Jacob Bliss is a reporter for Breitbart News. Write to him at jbliss@breitbart.com or follow him on Twitter @JacobMBliss and Truth Social @JacobBliss.
COMMENTS
Please let us know if you're having issues with commenting.