• Could Courts Be Waking Up? Maybe There WERE Election Irregularities in 2020 …

    Don’t let Leftist social media shut us out! Sign up for Daily Surge’s daily email blast… it’ll keep you updated on each day’s Daily Surge new columns. Go to dailysurge.com and sign up under “Free Newsletter” on the right side of the page, one-third of the way down. It’s easy! And like it says, it’s free!

    One of the week’s most popular …

    Surge Summary: A few lower courts seem to be interested in addressing certain election “irregularities” that reportedly cropped up in last November’s vote. Could more progress in preserving voter integrity be down the road for America?

    by Steve Pauwels 

    It’s nice to stumble across rare examples of American courts — albeit, admittedly, only lower ones so far — stepping up to do their job. In these instances, tribunals in Michigan, Wisconsin and Virginia have ruled on some of the sketchy election scenarios from a few months back.

    John Solomon reports in part:

    Long after former President Donald Trump dropped his legal challenges to last fall’s election, some courts in battleground states are beginning to declare the way widespread absentee ballots were implemented or counted violated state laws.

    The latest ruling came this month in Michigan, where the State Court of Claims concluded that Democratic Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson’s instructions on signature verification for absentee ballots violated state law. …

    In neighboring Wisconsin, the state Supreme Court handed down a significant ruling in December when the justices concluded that state and local election officials erred when they gave blanket permission allowing voters to declare themselves homebound and skip voter ID requirements in the 2020 elections. …

    Meanwhile in Virginia, a judge in January approved a consent decree permanently banning the acceptance of ballots without postmarks after Election Day, concluding that instructions from the Virginia Department of Elections to the contrary in 2020 had violated state law.

    Of course, since November 6 the Supreme Court has waved off more than one opportunity to address the propriety — or lack thereof — of State’s tinkering suspiciously with their election guidelines in the run up to the big day. Weirdly — Justice Clarence Thomas preferred the term “baffling” — a majority of the justices glanced at these colorably unconstitutional gambits and responded with a pronounced “Meh.”

    What’s the raison d’être of the High Court if it won’t confront reckless, lawless ploys that affect the selection of those who shape our government?

    Justice Gorsuch, after all, opined last October that “[t]he Constitution provides that state legislatures—not federal judges, not state judges, not state governors, not other state officials—bear primary responsibility for setting election rules … [a]nd the Constitution provides a second layer of protection, too. If state rules need revision, Congress is free to alter them.”

    These principles are, in fact, among those which were arguably flouted when non-legislators in a number of states jiggered with the “manner of elections” in their jurisdictions in the run-up to voting day.

    The Supremes’ latest dodge on this matter was their refusal to consider a case involving dubious mail-in ballots out of Pennsylvania 2020. Justices Neil Gorsuch and Samuel Alito dissented from their colleagues’ decision, and Justice Clarence Thomas pointedly joined that duo, observing:

    If state officials have the authority they have claimed, we need to make it clear.  If not, we need to put an end to this practice now before the consequences become catastrophic … [b]ecause the judicial system is not well suited to address these kinds of questions in the short time period available immediately after an election, [the court] ought to use available cases outside that truncated context to address these admittedly important questions.

    One wonders what this Court waits for.  We failed to settle this dispute before the election, and thus provide clear rules. Now we again fail to provide clear rules for future elections. The decision to leave election law hidden beneath a shroud of doubt is baffling. By doing nothing, we invite further confusion and erosion of voter confidence. Our fellow citizens deserve better and expect more of us.

    Alito concurred, “[T]he election is over,” there  is “no reason for refusing to decide the important questions that these cases pose.”

    Thankfully for those of us who are still arching an eyebrow at some of  Election 2020’s dodgy goings-on, a handful of inferior courts are echoing the concerns of Thomas, Gorsuch, Alito and Co. — which means, in the very least, these are not yet moribund issues.

    Solomon offers some concluding encouragement:

    Several more legal challenges remain in states, as well as two audits/investigations of voting machine logs that are pending in Georgia and Arizona. And while there has been no proof the elections were impacted by widespread fraud, there are still significant disputes over whether rule changes and absentee ballot procedures in key swing states may have been unlawful.

    In addition, the Thomas More Society’s Amistad Project on election integrity is pursuing litigation over whether hundreds of millions of dollars donated by Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg and routed to local election officials in several battleground states may have unlawfully influenced the election, according to the project’s director, Phill Kline.

    “We’re expanding our litigation,” Kline told the John Solomon Reports podcast on Wednesday. “I still have suits that are active in Michigan and Georgia on this, and you’ll see us take new action in Wisconsin. And we will renew action in Pennsylvania. And, and our involvement in Arizona will take a little bit of a different tack, but will involve this. The Arizona legislature is going to do an audit and we want this within the scope.”

    In other words, the election between Joe Biden and Donald Trump may be settled, but the battle over how elections will be governed – especially as it relates to absentee ballots and private funding of election clerks – has only just begun.”

    Hardly surprising, it’s not getting much attention from the Mainstream Press, but the struggle for election integrity has lately gained a bit of heartening ground — and may expect to snatch some more in the nation’s near future. All the more reason to refuse to back down on this business, so vital to the honorable operating of America’s constitutional republic.

    The views here are those of the author and not necessarily Daily Surge

    Image: Adapted from: Prettysleepy from Pixabay

    Steve Pauwels

    Steve Pauwels is pastor of Church of the King, Londonderry, NH, Managing Editor over at dailysurge.com and host of Striker Radio with Steve Pauwels on the Red State Talk Radio Network. He's also husband to the lovely Maureen and proud father of three fine sons: Mike, Sam and Jake.

    Trending Now on Daily Surge

    Send this to a friend