persons are often easily manipulated – without the need for inducements, threats, or duress. In such cases, the use of Section 10307(e) as a prosecutive theory should be considered. See generally United States v. Odom, 736 F.2d 104 (4th Cir. 1984). The main federal criminal statutes that can apply to voter intimidation are: 52 U.S.C. § 20511(1); 18 U.S.C. §§ 241, 242, 245(b)(1)(A), 594, and 610. Each of these statutes is discussed below. (a) Intimidation in voting and registering to vote: 52 U.S.C. § 20511(1) In 1993, Congress enacted the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA), 52 U.S.C. §§ 20501 through 20511. The principal purpose of this legislation was to require that the states provide prospective voters with uniform and convenient means by which to register for the federal franchise. In response to concerns that relaxing registration requirements may lead to an increase in election fraud, the NVRA also included a series of election crimes, one of which prohibits knowingly and willfully intimidating or coercing25 prospective voters in registering to vote, or for voting, in any election for federal office. 26 52 U.S.C. § 20511(1). Violators are subject to imprisonment for up to five years. For guidance in determining what constitutes “intimidation” or “coercion” under this statute, see the discussion of 18 U.S.C. § 594 below. Voter “intimidation” accomplished through conduct not covered by this statute or Section 594 may present violations of the Voting Rights Act, 52 U.S.C. § 10307(b), which is enforced by the Civil Rights Division through non-criminal remedies. 25 26 The jurisdictional element for Section 20511(1) is “in any election for Federal office.” This is slightly different phraseology than used in Sections 1 0 3 0 7 (c) and (e), as discussed above. In matters involving intimidation in connection with voter registration, this jurisdictional element is currently satisfied in every case because voter registration is unitary in all 50 states: i.e., one registers to vote only once to become eligible to vote for federal as well as non-federal candidates. However, when the intimidation occurs in connection with voting, the jurisdictional situation might not be as clear. Absent case law to the contrary, federal prosecutors should advocate the position that “an election for Federal office” means any election in which a federal candidate is on the ballot. 51