Legal Challenges

The post-election fight is being fought on three broad fronts: Legal challenges, claims of fraud and allegations of crooked voting machines.

I thought the legal challenges relating to election law violations were the strongest of the claims. In general how election laws, rules and procedures were modified/ changed in an unconstitutional way, in violation of state law or how election laws, rules and procedures were not followed.

Most of the court cases dealt with the claims of fraud and allegations of crooked voting machines, but there were a handful of cases that addressed violations of election law. In sum, the courts have done nothing to enforce existing election laws.

This is beyond Donald Trump and Joe Biden. It cuts to the issue of voting integrity and the core of our now crumbling republic — free and fair elections.

As a result of inaction by the courts, there is going to be more and more anything goes “laws”, “rules” and activity in general when it comes to elections. It is going to be less about the candidates and the issues they run on, and more about which candidate/ party can best manipulate and work the now fluid voting system in order to get elected.

Our voting system is yet another fundamental institution that is crumbling beneath our feet. As I wrote 10 years ago, our nation is in decline and we have a front row seat in watching it all unfold.

I thought the legal case with the most merit was in Pennsylvania where the State Constitution requires voting in person on Election Day, and only four excuses for absentee voting.

The PA legislature passed Act 77 last year that expanded absentee voting to all. This was a clear violation of the constitution because the only way to change those voting rules is via referendum. That was not done. As a result more than 1 million cast illegal votes on and leading up to Election Day in the state.

Unfortunately, the state Supreme Court ruled against the petitioners (and their own constitution) saying the petitioners failed to file their challenge in a timely manner. That is, the court stated the case needed to be filed before Election Day. Cop out. How do you file a civil suit based upon speculation, before Election Day, when you have yet to incur damages?

Despite that Chief Justice Saylor agreed with the petitioners that the case was on solid legal footing,“I find that the relevant substantive challenge raised by Appellees presents troublesome questions about the constitutional validity of the new mail-in voting scheme.”

The trial judge, Patricia McCullough, said the same, “petitioners appear to have established a likelihood to succeed on the merits because petitioners have asserted the Constitution does not provide a mechanism for the legislature to allow for expansion of absentee voting without a constitutional amendment.”

The courts also turned a blind eye to the executive branch changing election laws, rules and requirements, an authority that is reserved for the legislature only as stated in the US Constitution.

In WI a person can vote absentee if he/she is “indefinitely confined” to their home. Some election official got on Facebook and said because of COVID-19 everyone could declare themselves indefinitely confined and vote absentee.

Unfortunately, under the definition of the law, most all of the citizens of WI were not indefinitely confined (Covid-19 notwithstanding). In sum, an executive rewrote an election law, which only the legislature has the authority to do, and hence they were illegal votes.

The state of Wisconsin was sued for this. In a 4 to 3 vote the WI Supreme Court used the same reasoning to rule against the petitioners, saying the lawsuit was filed too late and the majority of justices overlooked the violations of election law. And it is not only me saying this, but three of the dissenting justices as well. From Justice Drake Roggensack: “… four justices on this court cannot be bothered with addressing what the statutes require to assure that absentee ballots are lawfully cast.”

“The Milwaukee County Board of Canvassers and the Dane County Board of Canvassers based their decisions on erroneous advice when they concluded that changes clerks made to defective witness addresses were permissible.”

“The Dane County Board of Canvassers erred again when it approved the 200 locations for ballot collection that comprised Democracy in the Park.”

"If Wisconsin Election Commission has been giving advice contrary to statute, those acts do not make the advice lawful. WEC must follow the law.”

“The majority of justices did not bother addressing what the boards of canvassers did or should have done, and instead, four members of this court throw the cloak of laches over numerous problems that will be repeated again and again, until this court has the courage to correct them.”

From Justice Annette Ziegler: “We are called upon to declare what the law is. Once again, in an all too familiar pattern, four members of this court abdicate their responsibility to do so. They refuse to even consider the uniquely Wisconsin, serious legal issues presented… Make no mistake, the majority opinion fails to even mention, let alone analyze, the pertinent Wisconsin statutes.”

The US Supreme Court ruled the state of Texas did not have standing or a vested interest in how those four states ran their elections, even if those states violated the US Constitution in conducting their elections.

Again the merits of the law was never considered by the court. Whether Texas has standing is debatable, but given no other court was stepping in to uphold the law and constitutions so the Supreme Court should have taken the case.

In PA, WI and even what went on in GA were black and white violations of their State Constitutions and/ or state laws. And yet, nothing was done about it. The US Supreme Court was the last hope and they took a pass.

You saw this throughout these court cases that addressed the legal angle of election laws. Some unauthorized entity changed election law or gave advice contrary to the law, and instead of throwing out those votes, the courts looked the other way and said we should count those illegal votes because the courts didn’t want to get in the middle of this.

Creating and modifying election laws is reserved for the legislatures. However, going forward, if a governor or secretary of state or election officials creates modifies or changes elections laws/ rules, which are followed by the election, too bad. All the votes, legal and illegal, will be counted because no court is going to have the courage to throw them out.

What is unfolding here is beyond Donald Trump and Joe Biden. Our election system is being chiseled away bit by bit. If we don’t all realize this, free and fair elections will soon be a thing of the past.

Our election process needs to be independently investigated, and reforms put forward and implemented.