Wisconsin Court Shoots Down Attempt to Change Rules for Absentee Ballots...

[Eupher]

...before mid-terms

There's just one problem with these lawsuits flying around. If a corrupt Secretary of State or Elections Commissioner decides to change the rules at the last minute, it's too late for a lawsuit. But this is encouraging, especially in Cheeseville, which - like my home state of Michigan - isn't known for election integrity.

A Wisconsin judge on Wednesday dealt a blow to a group in the state who hoped to change rules governing absentee ballots, denying their request that local election clerks accept absentee ballots that contain partial addresses of witnesses.

Dane County Circuit Judge Juan Colas said in his ruling (pdf) that in the past 56 years that Wisconsin elections have been conducted, and absentee ballots counted, they have apparently been done so “without a legally binding definition of the witness address.”

The judge noted that the nearly 60 years of precedent was enough to determine whether an absentee ballot has enough of a witness address to count.

“Since then, until the present, clerks have been legally free to interpret the term. They presumably have done so in good faith, in keeping with their oaths of office, and drawing on the non-binding guidance issued by the WEC and its predecessors, and perhaps also on advice from their jurisdictions’ attorneys,” Colas wrote.

“In short, the legal status quo with respect to the definition of ‘address’ is the same as it has been for 56 years. Local clerks apply their understanding of the term ‘address’ to absentee ballot certifications, relying on non-binding advice from state elections authorities and, at least in some cases, advice from their municipal attorneys,” Colas continued.

“Evidence that there is variation in how clerks interpret the term (even evidence of increased variation), does not change the status quo, which is that the law has always left room for local clerks to interpret and apply the term to the ballot envelope before them.”

According to guidance from the Wisconsin Elections Commission (WEC), an address is defined as three components: a street number, street name, and municipality.

‘Varying Interpretations’ of Address Requirement Being Applied
In a motion (pdf) filed in court on Oct. 25, Rise Inc, a group that works to get young people to vote, said that new evidence had come to light which showed that “clerks across Wisconsin are applying varying interpretations of the absentee ballot witness address requirement,” denying the idea that WEC’s three-component definition is the ‘status quo.'”

The group has asked that an address requires only enough information to determine the location of the witness.

Colas on Wednesday said it was inappropriate to issue an order that changes the status quo.

The ruling comes within days of the Nov. 8 midterm elections. Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers, a Democrat, and Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) are both up for reelection in the battleground state.

In a separate case this week, the 1st District Court of Appeals declined to hear an appeal of a ruling from Dane County Circuit Judge Nia Trammell in late October regarding the League of Women Voters of Wisconsin.

The League asked that the court declare that a missing address on a mail-in ballot means only that the address field is left entirely blank, and that election officials be allowed to count mail-in ballots with incomplete addresses on them.

Trammell rejected the request, arguing that it “would upend the status quo and not preserve it” and “frustrate the electoral process by causing confusion,” with just weeks to go until the elections.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/wisconsin-court-shoots-down-attempt-to-change-rules-for-absentee-ballots-before-midterms_4838970.html?src_src=News&src_cmp=breaking-2022-11-03-2&est=mLUhuvYG7pckQqTp1HJcsbbN2dx1gQWiwMYXvydWZXtXlqbs%2BD%2FcS%2Fdq09B%2B9UkCLV0%3D

[Texacon]

What is the deal with democrats and things like ID’s, legal addresses, being able to follow directions and out a date on a ballot, signature verification …

I’m all for everyone voting (yes, even the DUmmies), but damn, make sure it’s a LEGAL vote!!

KC

[Old n Grumpy]

What is the deal with democrats and things like ID’s, legal addresses, being able to follow directions and out a date on a ballot, signature verification …

I’m all for everyone voting (yes, even the DUmmies), but damn, make sure it’s a LEGAL vote!!

KC

Doing away with all that makes it harder for them to cheat and rig an election

[Eupher]

What is the deal with democrats and things like ID’s, legal addresses, being able to follow directions and out a date on a ballot, signature verification …

I’m all for everyone voting (yes, even the DUmmies), but damn, make sure it’s a LEGAL vote!!

KC

Dems/leftists find it difficult to follow the law -- when it suits them to do otherwise. Plain and simple. They believe their right to seize control outweighs their obligation to follow a democratically-governed process.

In the same light, like Woodrow Wilson more than 100 years ago, COTUS is a malleable document that can be changed, altered, deleted at the stroke of a pen. It should be easy to change the system -- when it suits them.

Control.