Hillary Clinton
Related: About this forumThe "we didn't understand the laws" claim didn't work -
https://twitter.com/RiotWomennn/status/738081361299283968BS California supporters lawsuit thrown out.
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)SunSeeker
(51,550 posts)BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)The rules are on the Secretary of State's site. It's not hard to find, and if you're really as passionate and driven to vote for Sanders in the California Democratic Primaries, a little googling would've gotten to where you're supposed to be to read the rules that's equal for everyone.
sarae
(3,284 posts)Sort of like the KY recount...
Gothmog
(145,152 posts)sheshe2
(83,747 posts)Awesome news.
the chest puffing has been throttled once again.
charlyvi
(6,537 posts)U.S. District Court Judge William Alsup described allegations by plaintiffs counsel as hot air shortly before ruling verbally from the bench, colorfully noting that theres a not a single decision in the history of the universe equating plaintiffs alleged facts with a violation of the U.S. Constitutions Equal Protection Clause. Alsup added that plaintiffs made absolutely no showing of a violation of federal law.
Im gratified by the courts ruling, which strongly affirms what we said from the beginning: that literally every violation these plaintiffs alleged was inaccurate, said San Francisco City Attorney Dennis Herrera. I think its unfortunate that plaintiffs proceeded with litigation, even after we took time to demonstrate that their case had no basis in reality. Well never know for sure if this lawsuit was just a political stunt, but I think Judge Alsup summed it up well in two words: hot air.
San Francisco, Alameda County, and state elections officials were sued on May 20 by an unincorporated association of Sanders backers called the Voting Rights Defense Project, who together with the American Independence Party and two San Francisco voters leveled an array of allegations that Herrera called wholly baseless. Specifics of the injunction order sought by Sanders supporters included: requiring poll workers in Californias 58 counties to individually inform no party preference voters of their right to request a partisan presidential primary ballot; compelling statewide television, radio, internet and email announcements to inform voters about state election laws; and, if possible, to extend Californias voter registration deadlinewhich already passed on May 23 for eligibility to vote in the June 7 primaryuntil election day itself. The original civil complaint filed on May 20 sought additional injunctive relief, which included a requirement for California elections officials segregate ballots already cast by unaffiliated voters, and to allow re-votes by those voters for presidential primary candidates.
http://www.sfcityattorney.org/2016/06/01/federal-judge-calls-sanders-backers-arguments-hot-air-denies-bid-emergency-injunction/
DURHAM D
(32,609 posts)UtahLib
(3,179 posts)OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)'Cause nothing sez integrity more than "gimme another chance 'cause I'm stupid".
Her Sister
(6,444 posts)http://www.sfcityattorney.org/2016/06/01/federal-judge-calls-sanders-backers-arguments-hot-air-denies-bid-emergency-injunction/
savalez
(3,517 posts)charlyvi
(6,537 posts)This i in the PDF document below the article. It's an actual explanation of the filing. Could they not have just logged on to the CA elections page and learned what the rules are. This suit makes it sound like the State of California failed by not notifying them of the rules via TV, email, social media and snail mail. Has all self reliance vanished from our public life?
3. The impact of failure to inform NPP voters (no party preference voters) of their right to obtain a crossover ballot and to vote in the Presidential primary is significant, as is the failure to inform party-affiliated voters of their right to re-register as no party preference voters and still receive the Presidential primary ballots of the Democratic, American Independent, and Libertarian parties. All Californians voting rights have been and will continue to be denied or unreasonably infringed upon due to the lack of oversight of the California Secretary of State and county Boards of Elections.
http://www.sfcityattorney.org/2016/06/01/federal-judge-calls-sanders-backers-arguments-hot-air-denies-bid-emergency-injunction/