The Federalist has learned that an election integrity organization that withdrew its claims to remove reportedly unsuitable registrants from Nevada’s voting rolls plans to re-issue its difficulties after Election Day.
” We’re going to come back and refile after November 5th”, Citizen Outreach Foundation ( COF ) President Chuck Muth told The Federalist.
The COF’s Pigpen Project started earlier this year with the filing of citizen-led difficulties to possible unsuitable voters on state voter rolls. The party collaborated with local election officials to ensure that its documents were filed in accordance with state law by using information from government organizations and various sections of state statute.
The assistant’s group issued a letter on August 27 teaching local clerks to successfully stop processing challenges filed by the COF after the CFO spent months putting together this approach and navigating roadblocks erected by Democrat Secretary of State Cisco Aguilar’s business.
The directive’s Deputy Secretary of Elections Mark Wlaschin made the haphazardly claiming that Aguilar understood the “personal information” condition in the statute, which Muth’s group uses to refer to as “meaning the same thing” as it does in a distinct provision of state laws. Los Angeles County Commissioners were given the directive to “reject” legal problems that did not go against the law according to his company’s understanding, thereby limiting the CFO’s ability to challenge potential illegal registrants.
On September 20, Muth and his team filed a complaint against the Carson City and Storey County staff. The lawsuit claimed that the officials omitted any requests to address inadmissible candidates on the areas ‘ separate voter registration names. Some days afterwards, individual legal problems were brought against the acting clerks of Clark and Washoe Counties.
Left-wing companies immediately jumped in to justify Nevada’s noisy voting rolls. According to reports, state officials ‘ attorneys and the ACLU of Nevada and Democratic attorney and Russian cooperation scammer Marc Elias both filed motions for intervention in the case. Athar Haseebullah, the COF’s executive director, falsely claimed that the COF’s constitutional issues were” the most recent kind of voter suppression pushed by conspiracy theorists to undermine trust in our election system.”
Muth announced on October 12 that the Citizen Outreach Foundation had withdrawn its claims despite being determined to maintain fresh voting spins.
The Conductivity leader explained to The Federalist that the choice was based on “technical problems that we may or may not have won in judge,” but that were easily fixed. He specifically cited a claim made by COF’s opponents that the speech on its documents is “deficient” because it stated in its papers that “appeared to include moved” more than simply that” the voter]s moved.”
Another technical issue that Muth raised was an “open problem” regarding whether the jury would permit the removal of unlawful registrants within 90 days of a national poll. That concern comes from a clause in the 1993 National Voter Registration Act that mandates that states” full any software whose purpose is to carefully remove the names of disqualified voters from the official lists of available voters” no later than 90 days prior to the date of a main or general election for Federal office.
” We think that the law does not apply to]individual ] challenges, but]our opponents are ] claiming that they do”, Muth said.
The Conductivity president also made note of the uncertainty surrounding how localities may control ballots delivered to and returned from addresses held by those whose eligibility is being challenged.
” Because]the secretary of state’s office ] delayed so long in issuing their August memo and then everything had to happen in court, the ballots went out”, and there was” no way to stop” them from being sent to these allegedly unlawful registrants, Muth said. The legislation does not allow [election authorities ] to set aside ballots, even if the jury did decide in our favour, so that those votes could be resolved before being opened and counted, according to COF’s competitors.
” We were n’t sure if]our argument ] was going to fly or not, so we just decided to withdraw these lawsuits” and” come back and refile after November 5th”, he added.
Muth contended that his team has been” trying to get guidance from]Aguilar ] for months on how to do these]challenges ] with the right process ]and ] procedure]but ] were n’t getting any cooperation”.
In response to the COF’s decision to drop its suit, Aguilar and Nevada Attorney General Aaron Ford, even a Democrat, released claims smearing the firm’s attempts and glossing over the complex reasons Muth cited in his statement. Aguilar claimed that the group had filed “meritless challenges” to the voter rolls of Nevada, and Ford went one step further, baselessly claiming that the lawsuits were “vigilante voter roll maintenance” and were” a waste of time and an assault on Nevadans ‘ democratic rights.”
Muth told The Federalist that the COF filed roughly 33, 000 total challenges to potentially ineligible registrants in July and August and that such affidavits will aid the organization’s efforts to clean Nevada’s voter rolls following the election day.
” The good thing is now we have ]these affidavits ] on record. We’ve challenged those]individuals ]”, Muth said. So we now have grounds to complain about election integrity to the secretary of state and claim they did n’t want to look into this if” somebody mail-votes their ballot for them, or they cast the ballot, and]the challenged voter does n’t ] live there anymore.”
For more election news and updates, visit , electionbriefing.com.
The Federalist staff writer Shawn Fleetwood graduated from the University of Mary Washington. He previously served as a state content writer for Convention of States Action and his work has been featured in numerous outlets, including RealClearPolitics, RealClear Health, and Conservative Review. Follow him on Twitter @ShawnFleetwood