In a new Wisconsin election integrity case, the company of Democrats ‘ favorite lawfare musician, who was also the counsel behind the Russia-collusion fake, was all but laughed out of court.  ,
D. C. based Elias Law Group, founded by previous Clinton campaign and Democrat National Committee lawyer Marc Elias, brought a “novel” absentee ballot grievance against the position that an Obama- appointed judge called “head- scratching” . ,
In dismissing the complaint against the Wisconsin Elections Commission, U. The communist law organization’s outrageous claim that a state law requires a U.S. citizen to testify and mark an absent politician’s vote is a civil rights violation was quickly rejected by S District Court Chief Judge James D. Peterson.  ,
‘ Absurd’ Interpretation
In a 37- page ruling, Peterson railed against the complaint’s core argument, concluding that” the most obvious problem with plaintiffs ‘ interpretation is that it simply does not make any sense”.
The absurd outcomes to which plaintiffs ‘ interpretation would lead are justification enough to reject that interpretation. But the text, purpose, and history of]Wisconsin Statute ]§ 6.87 also support an interpretation that a witness is required to certify only the statements about the process of preparing the ballot”, Peterson wrote of the lawsuit, filed in the U. S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin.  ,
” It is plaintiffs ‘ interpretation that leads to head- scratching results”, the federal judge wrote.  ,
The Elias Law Group, practitioners of unbridled leftist lawfare, represent four Wisconsin residents who “wish to vote by absentee ballot in the 2024 election, but they do not want to comply with the witness requirement”, according to the lawsuit. They claim that it is difficult or inconvenient for them to ask any American citizen to observe them cast their absentee ballots.
According to Peterson,” they claim that the requirement violates two federal statutes, the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and they want to permanently enjoin the enforcement of the requirement.”  ,
Basic Requirements ,
Absentee voters are required to state on their ballot envelopes that they are residents of the district or ward in which they are casting their ballots, that they reside in the state, that they are eligible to vote, and that they are “unable or unwilling to appear at the polling place… on election day.” The absentee ballot preparation process must also be documented by the voter, according to the law.  ,
Witnesses are required to attescate that they are citizens of the United States and that the voting procedure was carried out as instructed. They must also state that they “did not solicit or advise the elector to vote for or against any candidate or measure.”
Pretty simple. Not much of a burden. And as Peterson notes, the law is “intended to serve legitimate and important purposes, such as deterring voter fraud, undue influence, and ballot harvesting”.
However, the Elias Law Group believes that the witness provision is an insult to civil rights. One of the plaintiffs, Anna Haas, “plans to be traveling overseas around the time of the November 2024 election”. She wo n’t have a U. S. citizen with her, so who will witness and sign her absentee ballot?! Well, any U. S. citizen traveling abroad could, or Haas could submit her ballot up to two weeks in advance, as Peterson notes. Plaintiff Anna Poi attends college in Minnesota. Poi prefers to use another Wisconsin voter as her witness so that she can “find and rely on the witness if it becomes necessary to cure the certificate.”
Putting aside the plaintiffs ‘ laughable “burdens,” Peterson claimed that these poor, unfortunate souls “have not demonstrated that either the Voting Rights Act of 1965 or the Civil Rights Act of 1964 require an absentee voter to prepare their ballot in front of a witness.”
” Incompatible with the Law,” you ask?
The federal judge was actually left scratching his head by the lawfare attorneys ‘ bizarre interpretation of the state’s absentee voting law. The legal dream team for Elias argued that the statute requires a witness to do more than just make sure the voter adheres to the law. According to their expanded interpretation, a witness would have to “certify that the voter is eligible to vote”.
However, Peterson wrote,” That interpretation is inconsistent with the text and purpose of the statute, and it is inconsistent with how the law has been interpreted since it was enacted.”  ,
The Elias Law Group’s interpretation, according to the ruling, would effectively force the witness to be a private investigator, determining the voter’s “age, residence, citizenship, criminal history, whether the voter is unable or unwilling to vote in person, whether the voter has voted at another location or is planning to do so, whether the voter is capable of understanding the objective of the voting process, whether the voter is under a guardianship, and, if so, whether a court has determined that the voter is competent”.
An attorney who puts the law before politics would be aware that that is not what the law demands.  ,
In his smackdown of the Elias attorneys ‘ absurd legal argument, Peterson wrote,” Plaintiffs ‘ expansive interpretation of the law would impose arbitrary restrictions on states ‘ authority to regulate elections and threaten any requirement on a voter to provide information on a ballot or related document, including a signature requirement or Wisconsin’s requirement that an absentee voter certify that he or she is not voting at another location.”  ,
Plaintiffs have not provided any justification for Congress’s proposed restrictions on states.
With that, the judge directed the clerk to close the case.  ,
Russia Hoax Architect
It’s what you might expect from a business that is” committed to helping Democrats win” and led by one of the main figures behind the Russia-collusion hoax.  ,
Insisted Marc Elias and other Democrat election deniers that the 2016 presidential election, which Republican Donald Trump won, was rigged because of alleged Russian collusion with the Trump campaign. They demanded and demanded a Russian-sourced dossier that accused Trump and his allies of all kinds of corruption because they were so committed to that idea. But the dossier turned out to be phony opposition research, paid for by Hillary Clinton’s campaign and the DNC she controlled. Elias and the crew continued to sell the hoax to a willing deep state and a hungry accomplice media that used it to try to overthrow a president they detested.  ,
” The legal mastermind probably most responsible for the leftist push to subvert our democracy, overturn elections, and destroy election integrity is Marc E. Elias”, wrote John Fund and Hans von Spakovsky in their 2021 book Our Broken Elections. Elias “has grown astoundingly wealthy representing Democratic candidates, political action committees, and party organizations” and” seems to have a monopoly on the Democratic political machine”.
It was Elias, as a partner with Perkins Coie, the law firm that represented Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign, who hired Fusion GPS to churn the dirt on her opponent.  ,
In a story titled” How a top Democrat lawyer undermined both sides ‘ confidence in U.S. elections,” Just The News reported in a piece headlined,” How a top Democrat lawyer undermined both sides ‘ confidence in U.S. elections. Fusion went on to get former MI6 agent Christopher Steele to create the infamous Steele dossier, which contained several salacious and since-debunked claims about Trump and his alleged ties to Russia.
Eight years later, Elias ‘ law group is using illegal tactics to rig election regulations in favor of Democrats all over the country, spending millions to weaken them in preparation for the rematch between Donald Trump and Joe Biden in November.  ,
The Federalist’s senior elections correspondent, Matt Kittle, is. An award- winning investigative reporter and 30- year veteran of print, broadcast, and online journalism, Kittle previously served as the executive director of Empower Wisconsin.
