According to the researchers, the review revealed what they describe as a significant discrepancy between the number of absentee ballots reported as counted and the number of absentee ballot envelopes that were ultimately provided by election officials.
The project was spearheaded by election integrity advocate Yehuda Miller, data analyst Phani Mantravadi, and a nationwide network of volunteers who spent months cataloging and verifying election records from Detroit’s 2020 election.
The investigation began after Miller secured access to a massive collection of election documents through a successful legal challenge. The records reportedly included absentee ballot applications, ballot envelopes, ballots, poll books, precinct records, and other election-related materials.
Miller’s effort started with a FOIA request submitted before election records were scheduled for destruction. After officials initially rejected the request, he pursued legal action and ultimately prevailed, forcing the release of the documents.
The scale of the records was staggering.
When Miller arrived in Detroit to meet with investigators in 2025, he reportedly brought a rented truck packed with election records collected through the lawsuit.
Those documents became the foundation for a months-long review process that involved more than 100 volunteers from around the country.
Investigators say each envelope was examined individually and entered into a searchable database. The information on the envelopes was then compared against Detroit’s Qualified Voter Files from both November and December 2020.
According to the team, every record underwent multiple rounds of review to reduce the possibility of data-entry mistakes.
The researchers credit Mantravadi’s Check My Vote platform for making the massive undertaking possible. The system reportedly linked scanned envelope images with voter registration records and voting histories, allowing volunteers to cross-reference information more efficiently.
The review focused heavily on Michigan’s absentee voting requirements that were in place during the 2020 election.
Under state law at the time, absentee voters were required to place their completed ballot inside an official return envelope and sign that envelope before it could be counted.
State instructions provided to voters included the following directive:
“Place the ballot or ballots in the return envelope and securely seal the return envelope.”
The instructions also made clear:
“Sign and date the return envelope in the place designated. Your signature must appear on the return envelope or the ballot will not be counted.”
Election officials also stamped envelopes with receipt information and, in many cases, included additional identifying details such as precinct numbers, absentee counting board assignments, and ballot numbers used during processing.
Investigators argue these safeguards serve an essential purpose because they create a documented chain of custody and provide a mechanism for verifying that a ballot was legally submitted by a registered voter.
Without the envelope, they contend, there is no voter signature available for verification and no corresponding ballot number that can be matched against election records.
As volunteers worked through the records, they say they discovered a substantial gap.
Detroit’s official election report stated that 174,384 absentee ballots were counted during the November 2020 election. However, investigators say the FOIA production yielded only 155,487 absentee ballot envelopes.
That discrepancy immediately raised questions among researchers.
After months of review, repeated audits of the data, and multiple verification checks, the team says it reached a startling conclusion.
According to their analysis, 26,901 absentee ballots that were reportedly counted in Detroit cannot be matched to the legally required absentee ballot envelopes that should have accompanied them.
The investigators characterize the finding as one of the most significant discoveries to emerge from their review of Detroit’s 2020 election records.
Supporters of the project argue the evidence warrants a thorough examination by state and local authorities. They maintain that the missing-envelope issue raises serious concerns about ballot verification procedures and election administration.
Critics, however, are likely to question the methodology, interpretation of the records, and whether alternative explanations exist for the apparent discrepancy.
Regardless of where the debate ultimately leads, the findings are expected to reignite discussions about election security, absentee voting safeguards, public transparency, and the handling of election records in one of the most closely scrutinized elections in modern American history.
The investigators say their work is far from over and that additional findings from the document review may be released in the future as they continue analyzing the enormous collection of Detroit election records.
