A federal judge in Wisconsin has dismissed a lawsuit that sought to remove the witness requirement for absentee voting in the major swing state. On Thursday U.S. District Judge James Peterson ruled against the lawsuit brought by the law firm of Marc Elias, a Democrat elections attorney, that sought to get rid of the requirement, Just The News reported. “Elias Law Group argued that the witness requirement violated the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and Civil Rights Act of 1964,” the report said. “According to the court’s opinion, ‘the most obvious problem’ with the attorneys’ argument ‘is that it simply does not make any sense,’” it said.
The judge ruled that if the plaintiff’s interpretation of the law were to be followed that it would mean that “every witness would have to determine the voter’s age, residence, citizenship, criminal history, whether the voter is unable or unwilling to vote in person, whether the voter has voted at another location or is planning to do so, whether the voter is capable of understanding the objective of the voting process, whether the voter is under a guardianship, and, if so, whether a court has determined that the voter is competent.”
The judge said that the “absurd results to which” the arguments “would lead are reason enough to reject” them. Derek Lyons, the president of the elections integrity group RITE, celebrated the decision. “Since its founding in 2022, RITE has been extremely active in Wisconsin and is proud to have made yet another contribution to the integrity of elections in that state. It’s essential that people voting by mail follow the law in doing so, and Wisconsin has implemented a witness signature requirement that helps ensure they do just that. This case marks another example of liberal activists’ transparent and shameful efforts to co-opt important civil rights legislation for their partisan agendas. Sadly, it is all too clear that these activists are more interested in making unfounded accusations than in ensuring impartial and accurate elections,” he said.
The press release from the group went on to explain its stance. “In a Thursday evening ruling, a federal court in Wisconsin denied liberal activist attorney Marc Elias’s effort to block the state from enforcing its longstanding requirement that mail voters have a witness confirm their compliance with the state’s voting laws. This continues a losing streak for Elias in his efforts to distort the Materiality Provision of the venerable Civil Rights Act into a tool to undermine America’s elections. At the end of March, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals similarly rejected his effort to use the same law to block Pennsylvania from enforcing its requirement that voters sign and date their mail ballots. The three judges who decisively rejected his arguments in these two cases were all appointed by Democrat Presidents,” it said.
“The court’s opinion is a decisive rejection of Elias’s ill-conceived legal argument. As the Court put it, “the most obvious problem” with the argument “is that it simply does not make any sense.” The court later added that the “absurd results to which” his arguments “would lead are reason enough to reject” them. The court also emphasized the importance of the Third Circuit’s recent unequivocal rejection of his out-of-the-mainstream theories, observing that the “Third Circuit’s reasoning is persuasive” as it comprehensively ‘explains why the statute’s text, legislative history, and logic all support an interpretation that the Materiality Provision does not apply to ballot preparation,’” the group said.
“The defeated litigants have twenty-nine days to decide if they want to test their arguments with the Court of Appeals. RITE will continue to defend election law in Wisconsin, as necessary,” it said. Honest Elections Project Executive Director Jason Snead also praised the decision. “A federal judge has officially thrown out a lawsuit filed by Left-wing attorney Marc Elias challenging a key election integrity provision requiring absentee ballot signature verification, exposing his radical legal strategy to flood the zone with dozens of frivolous lawsuits,” he said. “The plaintiff’s theory in this case was yet another example of Elias and the left twisting old statutes to attack modern ballot safeguards,” the executive director said. “In this case, they asked a court to conclude that requiring a witness signature on a mail ballot was illegal vouching under the Voting Rights Act.
“In the Jim Crow era, many places required a registered voter to vouch for the qualifications of a new voter in order to prevent African Americans from voting. Obviously, that law was not intended to prevent widely used election integrity measures for mail ballots. Fortunately, common sense prevailed, and an Obama appointed judge agreed, wisely dismissing the case,” he said. But the Jim Crow era is over and elections need to be fair and free for us who have the right to vote, and are registered to vote. By the left trying this it's so they can have the MILLIONS of illegals Joe Biden and his open borders have allowed in the last 4 years.
They have been at this for this entire year.... This is just the latest unlawful leftist move in this state.
The video here on top showed how they tried to do this to hurt the GOP race early on and help remove Donald Trump which failed... Don't read anything other into this than what it is. This is clear election fraud and interference once again attempted pre-election by DEMOCRATS to RIG another election. Period.
No comments:
Post a Comment