Federal judges in North Carolina and Pennsylvania ruled in favor of the Republicans in lawsuits brought by the states’ Democratic parties against their GOP counterparts, the Trump campaign, Trump ally Roger Stone, and Stone’s group Stop The Steal.
Democrats had asked the courts to intervene in what they described as vigilante voter intimidation tactics. U.S. District Court Judge Catherine Eagles, in Greensboro, N.C., and U.S. District Court Judge Paul Diamond, in Philadelphia, issued decisions Monday declining to get involved.
Both judges said the Democrats hadn’t brought forward enough evidence to show the Republicans were planning voter intimidation activities.
“On Election Day, if it becomes apparent that agents of any defendant or supporters encouraged by any defendant are making an effort to intimidate minority voters or to further incite intimidation of voters, the plaintiff may
renew the motion,” Eagles wrote in her decision.
The lawsuits were part of a multi-state legal battle Democrats launched preemptively in light of Trump’s calls for poll watchers in “certain areas,” as well as comments made by state officials and Trump supporters. Federal judges in Arizona and Nevada were also skeptical of the Democrats’ claims.
Meanwhile, a federal judge in Ohio placed a restraining order against the Trump campaign and Stone in the lawsuit filed by the Ohio Democratic Party, only to have the restraining order blocked by an appeals court over the weekend. The Supreme Court on Monday denied the Ohio Democrats’ request to intervene in that proceeding.
There is also a lawsuit filed by Michigan Democrats against Trump, Stone and the state GOP that is awaiting a federal judge’s decision.
This might be a good week to invest in Kevlar.
I will be so relieved in a few months, when Clinton and a Democratic Senate can finally fill the courts with progressive judges.
Its like the battle of the judges at this point.
And it has come to this. Our elections have become a fight over the right to vote without voter suppression or intimidation, rather than a heated discussion over differences in policies and programs.
Not sure what you mean. Maybe you could spell it out.
Should I be reporting you to the Secret Service?