Trump allies suffer court losses in battleground states
28/10/2024 5:53
Donald Trump's Republican allies have
suffered a string of courtroom setbacks in battleground U.S.
presidential election states as Election Day draws closer,
losses that could boost voter turnout and speed certification of
the eventual winner.
In the past three weeks, Trump's allies have been dealt at
least 10 court losses in battleground states that could decide
the outcome of the Nov. 5 contest between Republican former
President Trump and his Democratic rival, Vice President Kamala
Harris.
On Friday, they were dealt another loss in Virginia, when a
federal judge blocked the state's removal of people it said had
not proved their citizenship from its voter rolls.
U.S. District Judge Patricia Tolliver Giles said the removal
ran afoul of a federal prohibition on purging large numbers of
voters in the 90 days before an election. The state, which is
not a swing state this election, said it would appeal.
The other decisions include four rulings against Republicans
in Georgia, where judges have blocked last-minute changes to
election rules championed by Trump's allies, including one that
would have required poll workers to hand count ballots, as well
as cases seeking to purge voter rolls and block some Americans
who are living overseas from voting.
The party's recent losses suggest its legal strategy is
coming up short in court, which some legal experts said will
likely be a net positive for voter turnout. The losses in
Georgia, meanwhile, will likely make it easier for officials
there to quickly count and certify vote totals, the experts
said.
"If courts had accepted some of these arguments, it could
have had a huge impact on voter disenfranchisement," said
Richard Hasen, a law professor at the University of California,
Los Angeles.
In one of a handful of wins for Republicans, the 5th U.S.
Circuit Court of Appeals on Friday ruled that mail-in ballots
can only be counted if they are received by Election Day,
invalidating Mississippi's five-day grace period. Mississippi is
not a swing state, and the ruling does not directly apply to any
battleground states.
The Republican court losses undermine what party members say
are efforts to tighten election security measures to prevent
fraud, which Trump falsely claims cost him the 2020 election.
Democrats and voting rights groups have accused Republicans
of trying to make it harder for people to cast ballots and for
officials to count them.
Some of the cases could be reversed on appeal and other
election cases brought by Republicans are pending.
Republican National Committee spokeswoman Claire Zunk
defended the party's legal record in a statement and said it
will continue to "fight for a fair and transparent election for
all Americans."
"Our unprecedented election integrity operation is committed
to defending the law and protecting every legal vote. We have
engaged, and won, in record numbers of legal battles to secure
our election," Zunk said.
A Harris campaign spokesman said in a statement that
Republicans are using lawsuits to stoke baseless fears about
election security.
"For months, MAGA Republicans have tried to exploit our
legal system for free PR to broadcast lies about our free, fair
and secure elections, but they failed to provide a single shred
of evidence for their bogus claims," spokesman Charles Lutvak
said.
There have been 265 election-related lawsuits filed this
election cycle, including 71 filed by Republicans and their
allies, according to election litigation tracking website
Democracy Docket, founded by Democratic election lawyer Marc
Elias.
In addition to the Mississippi win, Republicans have touted
at least a half-dozen legal victories since August. Those
include blocking a voter registration deadline extension in
Georgia, forcing Michigan to tighten signature verification
measures and preventing the use of digital university IDs to
vote in North Carolina.
SETBACKS IN GEORGIA
But the past several weeks have seen a series of major
setbacks for Republicans, particularly in Georgia.
A state court judge ruled on Oct. 15 that local election
officials must certify results, rejecting a Republican election
board member's claim that she had discretion not to. The
official, Julie Adams, is appealing.
The judge, Robert McBurney, issued an order in a separate
case the following day that blocked the Georgia hand count rule
from taking effect, saying the change had been made too close to
the election.
In a third case, Superior Court Judge Thomas Cox invalidated
the hand count rule and six other changes pushed through by
Trump's allies on the state election board, saying they violated
state law.
Georgia's highest court on Tuesday rejected a Republican
request to fast-track its appeal of Cox's ruling, meaning the
case will not be resolved until next year.
Zunk said the rule changes were "commonsense measures to
safeguard our elections" and that Republicans are confident they
will prevail on appeal.
In his ruling, Cox said the board overstepped its authority
with the 11th-hour rule changes, declaring them "illegal,
unconstitutional, and void."
Judges applied similar reasoning in rejecting lawsuits
seeking to purge voter rolls of allegedly ineligible or
non-citizen voters in recent weeks in Arizona, Nevada, North
Carolina and Michigan, finding that the cases were filed too
close to the election.
In addition to the federal law prohibiting systematic purges
of voter rolls 90 days or less before an election, longstanding
court precedent holds that judges should avoid making
last-minute changes to election rules to prevent voter
confusion.
Republicans are appealing those decisions.
Other judges in battleground states have ruled against
Republicans in cases seeking to restrict overseas voting.
On Oct. 21, a Michigan judge tossed a lawsuit seeking to
tighten residency requirements for overseas absentee ballots,
saying the case lacked merit and was filed too late.
That same day, a North Carolina judge denied a Republican
bid for an initial order preventing North Carolina from using
similar eligibility rules for overseas voters.
"We are appealing both decisions in Michigan and North
Carolina because the law in both states is clear: If you've
never lived there, you can't influence their elections," Zunk
said.
BUTTRESSING CLAIMS OF FRAUD?
Hasen and other legal experts said many of the Republican
lawsuits were likely to fail from the beginning and could be
aimed primarily at sowing doubt about the election's legitimacy
and amplifying Trump's claims of fraud.
Paul Smith, a Georgetown Law professor and senior vice
president of the nonpartisan Campaign Legal Center, said the
early court losses may actually further Republicans' strategy of
spreading fears about voter fraud that could be leveraged to
challenge the results if Trump loses.
“What they’re likely going to do is bring up these claims of
fraud not so much as legal issues but to feed whatever
disruptive plan they have to mess with vote counting and mess
with certification,” Smith said.
|