Judge says CA primary lawsuit could be appealed to the Int'l Court of the Hague.

[pnwmom]

He really said that, but he was just being snarky.



The "Voting defense" lawyers had brought a flimsy State case to Federal court, and they waited to the last minute to do it. And Federal Judge Alsup says he's through with them.

http://www.courthousenews.com/2016/06/01/judge-rejects-sanders-supporters-voting-suit.htm

In denying all relief, Alsup chided the plaintiffs for waiting until May 20 to file their lawsuit, and May 27 to file their motion for an injunction asking, among other things, to extend California's voter registration deadline until election day itself and allow unaffiliated voters to recast their votes.

"That alone is a showstopper," the judge said of the late filings, adding that their claims are state-law claims and "this is a federal court."

Alsup also said there is no reason to flood voters with a deluge of already-available information.

"There is absolutely no showing of a federal violation. That more information might be available in one county over another does not rise to the level of equal protection," Alsup said. "Citizens of California are smart enough to know what their rights are. I'm giving my order now so you can get your writ to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and then the United States Supreme Court, then the International Court of the Hague. But you're done in federal court."

SNIP

[NurseJackie]

1. Good! And ...

"There is absolutely no showing of a federal violation. That more information might be available in one county over another does not rise to the level of equal protection," Alsup said. "Citizens of California are smart enough to know what their rights are. I'm giving my order now so you can get your writ to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and then the United States Supreme Court, then the International Court of the Hague. But you're done in federal court."

[NWCorona]

2. "supporters"

[bravenak]

3. They swore this would work

What a stupid lawsuit

[sufrommich]

4. It served two purposes.

1. Free publicity

2. Excuse du jour for why they were robbed in CA.

[hrmjustin]

5. Good!

[TwilightZone]

6. I don't think getting mocked out of court was in the game plan.

I'm glad the judge addressed the ridiculousness of this so directly.

[onenote]

7. There are a lot of bad lawyers out there

And the Sanders team seems to be using a disproportionate number of them.

[Luminous Animal]

9. This did not originate from the Sanders campaign.

[Tarc]

12. Indeed, this is a good one for them to steer clear of completely

We have to keep in mind here that anyone can sue anyone at any time...just the fact that there's a lawsuit does not grant automatic legitimacy to the complaint.

This is California we're talking about, where I'm sure nutter birther Orly Taitz is STILL filing lawsuit after lawsuit over Obama's birth certificate.

[pnwmom]

13. Not the campaign. From a supporter who's held a house party for the campaign.

The campaign could have asked him to cease and desist, but they probably appreciated the publicity the case brought to the voting process.

[onenote]

16. I was using the term "team" to refer to campaign plus supporters

But I stand corrected.

There are a lot of bad lawyers out there. And the Sanders supporters seem to rely on a disproportionate number of them.

[auntpurl]

8. Proper lol at the judge's comments.

[KingFlorez]

10. Of course the judge will be accused of corruption

[Starry Messenger]

11. Don't mess with the CA Fed judiciary.

They are having a banner week, between this guy and the other one who unsealed Trump's court papers.

[msongs]

14. how AMAZING that only sanders supporters are unable to figure out how to vote when this system has

been in place for years and multiple elections.

[pnwmom]

15. And I understand they're having trouble with the postcard

sent to non-affiliated voters.

The one that asks them to check a box for which ballot they want: Democratic. Republican. Independent.

What a shame.