How has the Secretary of State responded? Does this office believe it had the authority or the obligation to reject these candidates before the primary?

So I got a hold of Michael Howe.

He declined to comment, which is typical when you ask state officials about lawsuits.

But in emails to Pritchard, he said candidates who submit their signatures before the deadline can amend or correct missing or incomplete information.

There was one candidate in this matter referenced who submitted her paperwork at 3.59 p.m. on the day of the deadline, which was one minute before the submission deadline, which there's no time for that person to address the incomplete information.

information.

He also said in these emails with Pritchard, corrections to documents filed by candidates are allowed under state law and that state law doesn't identify a specific person that must make corrections, just that the documents have to be corrected before the filing deadline for candidates.

What does this case reveal about divisions within the North Dakota Republican Party?

What ultimately prompted that vote? And what does a referral to the attorney general really mean at this point?

So as I said, lawmakers had a lot of questions about the nature of these findings, what could potentially be corruption or criminal activity.

And again, to be clear, the audit did not conclude crimes or corruption here.

This vote came at the end of a day-long committee meeting to review various audits, not just this one.

And the audit findings, the testimony from the meeting will be sent to the Attorney General's office.

The Attorney General is not required to investigate this.

A little bit of history on this, Craig.

What did you learn when you visited with legal ethics professors and others about this issue?