Judge appears exasperated with Trump lawyer, refuses order to preserve Nevada poll data

ABA Journal ^

[TigerClaws]

A judge in Clark County, Nevada, on Tuesday ordered a lawyer for the Donald Trump campaign to sit down and denied his request for an order to preserve polling data at four polling places that stayed open late last Friday.

Judge Gloria Sturman said the Trump campaign had failed to exhaust administrative remedies before coming to court in a bid to preserve and sequester voting data for late-cast votes at the four locations in the Las Vegas area, according to tweets by National Law Journal reporter Zoe Tillman.

The campaign had also sought preservation of information on people working at the polls, according to Tillman, the Las Vegas Review-Journal and the Associated Press. The suit targets polling places with large minority populations, CNN reports.

According to the suit (PDF), the election law violations “were not random and neutral in their effect, but very much appear to have been intentionally coordinated with Democratic activists in order to skew the vote unlawfully in favor of Democratic candidates.”

Nevada law allows polling stations to remain open until everyone in line at closing time has a chance to vote, according to the suit. The Trump campaign says voters who showed up after the scheduled closing time at the four locations were allowed to vote, while voters at other sites who came late didn’t get to vote.

The lawsuit cites tweets about the late poll closings that encouraged people to go vote after the scheduled 8 p.m. closing time. The tweets came from “Twitter accounts supporting Democrats and the press,” according to the suit.

During the hearing on Tuesday, Sturman appeared “exasperated” as she “tore into Trump’s lawyers,” Vanity Fair reported.

[FreeAtlanta]

Learning how many votes they need. They don’t want to have too much attention by way overdoing it.

[SandRat]

To use some one Elise's word's “I Have a PHONE and a PEN.”
Now, I wonder whose that could ha been?

[Windflier]

“Why is this being reposted? The story is a week old.”

Don’t care. This is the first time I’ve seen it, and I read here several hours a day.

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

The next four years are a golden opportunity to restore FAIR ELECTIONS in America, as originally designed

Absolutely! If this reform is not done, I have doubts that we can outperform this last historic Republican sweeping election. Nevertheless, the left will come back with a hellbent revenge.

Agreed, with the caveat that the election of Electors to vote for POTUS is not a Federal election.

Article II Section 1:

Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.

Which implies that each State has plenary power to control the “presidential” election within it. If a state legislature wants to select the state’s electors by the flip of a coin, or restrict the voting in the state for POTUS to illegal aliens, there is actually no constitutional recourse.

But as far as voting for Congressman or Senator, that is a different matter. And if a state wants to have the presidential (i.e., elector) election on the same ballot as the Congressional/Senate election . . .