Judge Sanctions Trump Allies And Orders Legal Education For Failed Election Lawsuit

Skip to first unread message

Jim Soper2

Aug 26, 2021, 10:04:28 AM8/26/21
to election...@citizensoversight.org
Judge Sanctions Trump Allies And Orders Legal Education For Failed Election Lawsuit


"Nine attorneys aligned with former President Donald Trump who filed an unsuccessful lawsuit challenging Michigan's 2020 presidential election results will have to pay financial penalties and face other punitive actions for their legal effort, a district court judge ruled on Wednesday.

"This lawsuit represents a historic and profound abuse of the judicial process," U.S. District Judge Linda Parker wrote in her scathing decision on the case.

"It is one thing to take on the charge of vindicating rights associated with an allegedly fraudulent election," she wrote. "It is another to take on the charge of deceiving a federal court and the American people into believing that rights were infringed, without regard to whether any laws or rights were in fact violated. This is what happened here."

Josh Mitteldorf

Aug 26, 2021, 7:36:15 PM8/26/21
to Election Integrity
Whatever you think about the merits of the challenge, we should all be alarmed at the chilling effect that this is bound to have on future legal challenges. 

To post, send email to Election...@googlegroups.com. Please review the "Posting Guidelines" page.
Please forward EI messages widely and invite members to join the group at http://groups.google.com/group/ElectionIntegrity/members_invite.
If you're not a member and would like to join, go to http://groups.google.com/group/ElectionIntegrity and click on the "join" link at right. For delivery and suspension options, use the "Edit my membership" link.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Election Integrity" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ElectionIntegr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/ElectionIntegrity/6914a5da-725e-4e22-b755-059358fa3f5b%40Spark.

Jonathan Simon

Aug 27, 2021, 11:29:37 AM8/27/21
to aging...@gmail.com, Election...@googlegroups.com
Well yes and no. We would be well advised not to make wild legal challenges not only without supporting evidence but indeed against known evidence.
It's telling that they couldn't get to first base even with politically sympathetic Trump-appointed judges. You might suspect that was because the whole system colluded not to go there, but you'd be wrong: they also had ample opportunity to bring whatever case they had to the media and public (way, way, way more than we ever had); they kept promising "the kraken" and delivering a corn muffin.
They had nothing - probably because they were more intent on making any kind of splash, and keeping alive the mythology of a stolen election (indeed a "sacred landslide") - from which, incidentally, they raised a couple hundred million bucks - than on putting in the hard work necessary to make a serious case.
If they had even pulled together something on the order of my recently published paper, they would have had something like a leg to stand on. But, alas, all the statistical forensics stacked up against them. Maybe that should have told them something. Well, too bad, so sad - as my Civ Pro professor used to say.
Faulkner put it so well: "You can't get away from a shoddy job," says Cash Bundren in As I Lay Dying. I think the only lesson here - and it's not especially chilling - is don't be lazy and shoddy and stupid and you won't get in this kind of trouble.
Jonathan D. Simon
Executive Director, Election Defense Alliance (2006 - 2016)

Bill Simpich

Aug 27, 2021, 11:29:37 AM8/27/21
to Election...@googlegroups.com
Here’s the chilling effect - if you have no evidence, expect to be punished.

If you have well-vetted evidence, go forward.

Do not treat evidence as “whatever I can get a jury to believe.”


Reply all
Reply to author
0 new messages