BREAKING: ELECTION JUSTICE USA FILES EMERGENCY LAWSUIT IN NY

[silvershadow]

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Shyla Nelson, Election Justice USA

NEW YORK, April 18, 2016 - Election Justice USA, a national voting rights organization, is filing an emergency lawsuit in New York Federal District Court today, a day before the New York Primary.
Reports of thousands of NY voters being erroneously purged from the rolls was the cause for this emergency action on the part of the newly-formed national group. The lawsuit calls for the immediate restoration of voting rights for the thousands of eligible New Yorkers who, upon verifying their voter registration status recently, discovered their status was listed as “not registered” or, having registered and previously voted as Democrats, are now listed as “unaffiliated with any party (independent)” or “Republican,” thereby disqualifying them from voting in the state’s closed Presidential Primary on Tuesday.


“Voters are frustrated, angry, and feel helpless,” EJUSA spokeswoman Shyla Nelson said. “We have heard hundreds of stories, with desperate pleas for help. This election season has excited and galvanized the voting public in unprecedented numbers. For these voters to be systematically and erroneously removed from the rolls or prevented from voting in their party of choice is devastating to them personally and has sent a wave of doubt and worry through the voting public.”

Citing statutes from both the National Voting Rights Act (NVRA) and New York Election law, the suit also seeks to shift the burden of proof of eligibility from the voters to the Board of Elections, the named defendant in the case. “The Board of Elections, not voters, holds the voting records and should be responsible to prove a voter’s ineligibility, rather than putting this burden on the voter,” says Blaire Fellows, one of the lead attorneys filing the suit. “As it is currently structured, the statute places an onerous and excessive burden on the voter to prove their eligibility. It requires securing a court order, which takes time that many New Yorkers simply don’t have, as it means loss of income over and above what they lose by simply taking time off to vote.”

New York is one of a growing number of states across the nation who are facing these issues amidst increasing public pressure to make the election process more transparent to the public, as well as to make state primaries open to all voters, regardless of party affiliation - another request outlined in the lawsuit. “The integrity of the election process is vital to democracy,” says Ohio attorney Cliff Arnebeck, one of Election Justice USA’s legal advisors. Arnebeck, who has litigated against election fraud since 2000, says he believes the New York lawsuit “ensures that eligible voters are able to vote in the New York Primary and raises the right questions of responsibility and accountability in how elections are conducted.”

More: https://www.facebook.com/ElectionJusticeUSA/?ref=br_rs

[k8conant]

1. This is monumental.

[brooklynite]

23. A lawsuit that won't have any impact on tomorrow's voting is monumental...good to know

[DrDan]

33. this will change nothing with regard to tomorrow's primary

[Hortensis]

59. This post is sensationalist hyperventilation that is bound

to rev up outrage before the election. Caps and everything. Are Bernie supporters supposed to weep and riot when HRC wins tomorrow or something?

Before the tears of rage and grief spring, please consider that ANYONE can file a suit -- serious and principled or very otherwise. Why not wait to see if this private group's is
a. Dismissed.
b. Triggers an official investigation.
c. Proven justified or proven unjustified?

[greiner3]

64. Holy crap Batman

The number of Trump supporters on DU is amazing

[tokenlib]

2. There really has been a pattern this year....WTF?

Another Arizona mess...

[Sheepshank]

20. The pattern is that the BSers are only now finding out about Primary rules, instead of months ago nt

[NWCorona]

34. That's not true with this case

It's about registered Democrats being switched.

They played by the rules.

[CoffeeCat]

36. NO, these are people who switched from Independent to Dem a long time ago

But nice try, smearing disenfranchised voters.

Gotta run your smears, to obfuscate all of the shenanigans that follow Hillary Clinton everywhere she goes in this primary.

[hrmjustin]

3. This happened to my brother. He can't vote in this primary and he is pissed.

[bigwillq]

5. That's redic.

Everyone that wants to vote, should be able to, in both the D and R primaries.
They need to make it easier--not harder--for people to vote.

[hrmjustin]

7. Well unfortunately the NY senate is controlled by the gop and they won't

pass automatic voter registration.

[Bubzer]

13. +1

Very much so!

[dinkytron]

60. I hope that Bernie, win or lose, files lawsuits. Bet he will. This garbage must get exposed.

I think Bernie "gets it" in ways we cannot imagine. I can see his fundraising continuing even if he does not get the nom. He will be the shadow president!

[me b zola]

15. I stand with your brother and his right to vote!

[NWCorona]

37. I'm glad you are giving some weight to this issue.

It not about Hillary vs Bernie. It's about voting rights!

[restorefreedom]

43. everyone should be able to vote

same day reg, same day party switch.

this is ridiculous. no more "deadlines."

tptb do not want us involved. its that simple.

[Punkingal]

4. That is outstanding!

[HereSince1628]

6. I suspect not in the knick of time, but

this sets up the possibility of being given rights to pursue discovery of information which could help nail the election cheats that did this.

[ViseGrip]

8. KICK! All night long!

[Duval]

9. Good for EJUSA.

There have been too many instances of voter suppression already, and I'm wondering what is really going on. Best of luck to Atty Cliff Arnebeck.

[polichick]

10. Good news - purge the corruption from both parties!

[Bubzer]

30. Yes! The sooner, the better!

[Buzz Clik]

11. Breaking: this was decided in the Supreme Court decades ago.

Fail.

[Bubzer]

14. Breaking: It can be, and is being, re-littigated.

I should think you would support efforts to eliminate voter suppression, yet, for some reason you don't seem to be.... why is that I wonder?

[Buzz Clik]

18. The same law? Well, no one can stop them from trying. But we all know that this is ....

.... A BIG SHOW!

(there is no voter suppression; the rules apply equally to everyone.)

[Bubzer]

25. Your DNC buddies keep changing the rules to accommodate your candidate.

I guess the rules apply more equally to some than others.

[Buzz Clik]

31. This has been the law for decades.

[Bubzer]

44. Thousands of NY voters being erroneously purged from the rolls has been law for decades? I doubt It.

[NWCorona]

42. This story is new to me but it sights national and state laws in it's filing.

[AzDar]

12. Shame it's come to this, but good that they're trying to prevent the fraud that happened here, in NY

[Sheepshank]

16. Just another disorganized, last minute whine to cover up a total BS campaign fuck up.

Weaver is the worst.

[silvershadow]

21. Bernie's campaign didn't file this, as you know. nt

[Sheepshank]

24. BS and his surrogates...seems to be trained at the same school of "whoops, I missed this rule" n/t

[silvershadow]

26. Transcripts yet? nt

[Bubzer]

27. As opposed to your DNC buddies who're trained at "Whoops, we dont like that rule"

I guess the rules only count when they want them too.

[Bluenorthwest]

49. NY is an election embarrassment, low turnout getting always lower, year after year.

Anyone who supports that shit is a rotten Democrat. In 2014 NY State's turnout was just under 29%. NYC only managed 20%. It's pitiful, it's votes on the table and mostly Democratic votes. It's very telling that NY voter registration rates are good while the actual participation rates are terrible. This indicates post registration voter issues. It's not good. Unless you are a Republican I suppose.

[me b zola]

17. K&R!

[Joob]

19. Whatever your REASONING is to think this IS okay, KNOW that BECAUSE of it

The People trust the Democratic Party LESS. Plain and simple.

[silvershadow]

22. I don't think the party filed the suit. nt

[Maedhros]

29. Trust is earned.[n/t]

[Joob]

38. Agreed, I had to point it out to the people saying that nothing is wrong

[Maedhros]

50. If nothing else, this primary election has shown us to what degree the Party will game its elections

to try and control the outcome.

In 2000 and 2004 there were clear, unambiguous signs that election fraud with privatized voting machines was rampant. The Party did not even let out a whimper in opposition. There is a reason for this: they want to be able to make the voting machines work in their favor.

[brooklynite]

28. Can someone explain the Constitutional basis for allowing an open Primary?

I can't think of one. The Democratic Party is a private organization.

[brooklynite]

40. Simple; they're a private organization. They can select candidates however they want.

Voters have the right to vote in the General Election for any candidate put forward, or to write in one of their own.

[brooklynite]

45. How is the Democratic Party "controlling ballot access"?

You can run to be a Democratic nominee, or a WFP nominee or a Green nominee. You can even create your own Party, or run as an Independent.

[brooklynite]

48. Here in New York we have FIVE Political Parties with permanent ballot access...

...sorry your State doesn't. You get signatures to get on the ballot the first time, but you get ballot access by...actually getting people to vote for you.

[brooklynite]

52. Question: how many Democratic candidates for President are there?

[silvershadow]

54. One, as I have consistently stated throughout this campaign. The other is "Third Way"

and an interloper. I was here before she was. Fact.

[brooklynite]

61. How intolerant of you...

There are over 80 registered as Democratic candidates with the FEC. Sounds elitist to decide that a handful are "real" Democrats, huh?

[silvershadow]

62. no it sounds like a purge of a cancer in our party

[Bluenorthwest]

55. Oregon has a closed primary and consistently high turnout, NY has a closed primary and habitually

poor turnout. NYC turnout is downright shameful. So obviously NY has issues with voter participation that do not have to do with the closed nature of the Primary. NY turnout is consistently among the worst in the United States. That means the influential Democrats there are not very good at running their elections. Or that they are running them according to interests not served by greater participation.

[Trust Buster]

39. You're right. It's called a "Democratic Primary" for a reason. Only Democrats should vote.

[itsrobert]

46. How about using public resources

Or does the party reimburse the state for election fees?

that's all I can think of. Playing Devil's Advocate.

[shanti]

32. kicking

[Sheepshank]

53. facebook?

[silvershadow]

56. Placeholder until the filing hits the media/nets. Thanks. nt

[LuvLoogie]

57. Hillary ate my registration!!

[silvershadow]

58. Maybe they will find collusion/RICO violations if they find ties to Arizona?

Unlikely, and a pipe dream, to be sure, yet not outside the realm of possibility. There have been many, many irregularities this cycle, though not unexpected with a Clinton on the ticket.

[k8conant]

63. I hope so!