Fake lawsuit is a brazen, broad-daylight heist of N.C elections law
- Gov. Cooper and AG Stein are trying to pull a “sue-and-settle” scam with Roy Cooper’s former elections lawyer, Marc Elias.
- State courts, federal courts, administrative boards, and the legislature, all rejected their efforts to weaken elections law.
- So the State Board of Elections was “sued” by Gov. Cooper’s former elections lawyer – so they could “settle” this scam.
- The “plaintiffs” are a Democratic front group. Josh Stein was the keynote speaker at their 2018 convention – on elections law.
- The scam settlement goes well beyond the bounds of what the State Board of Elections even purported to authorize.
- The scam settlement would eliminate a witness signature requirement for absentee ballots that was upheld by courts.
- The scam doesn’t try to change regulations or rules – it tries to unilaterally rewrite state laws already upheld by the courts.
- This is not a judicial decision on the merits that lawmakers could appeal or debate, even though we are parties to the case.
- This is a “sue-and-settle” scam where instead of a case, the Board of Elections just agrees to whatever Democrat lawyers want.
- North Carolina Democrats are attempting a brazen heist in broad daylight out of sheer desperation to win the 2020 election.
- General Assembly leaders are defendants in this case, but were never consulted on the scam agreement.
- Republican members of the board resigned in protest.
- Meeting documents show the board was at best confused, and at worst misleading, about the details of the settlement.
- The motion taken by the board to authorize the settlement not only doesn’t match the settlement details – they contradict.
- Now AG Josh Stein has released a false “fact sheet” claiming “these proposed actions comply with a federal court order.”
- In fact, the federal court required the witness signature remain in place – but the consent agreement guts the requirement.
- So the “fact sheet” posted by Josh Stein today is itself misleading, and at worst deceptive.
- Meeting minutes released by the Board of Elections show staff emphasizing the witness signature requirement must remain law.
- But the “consent agreement” would allow unwitnessed ballots to be accepted and counted. No wonder the members were confused.
- The meeting documents released by the Board of Elections verify the resigning members’ claims of confusion and deception.
- Collusive settlement agreements like this are a problem throughout the law and are generally prohibited by courts.
- It is vital to have public confidence in our elections today in North Carolina, and the United States.
- Free and fair elections demand we set aside partisan politics and honor our nation’s founding principles.
- To prepare for our role as the #1 battleground state, we built one of the most accessible elections systems in the U.S.
- North Carolina is the first state to vote, has three weeks of early voting, and “no-excuse needed” absentee ballots.
- Over 100,000 North Carolinians have already cast their vote.
- This year, the legislature passed more elections funding and reforms in the Bipartisan Elections Act of 2020.
- To address poll worker shortages, we increased their pay and funding to fill those positions.
- We reformed our absentee ballot laws, funded new online portals, and sent grants to local boards to help with operations.
- We rose to the challenge of being THE battleground state.
- Improving our elections builds confidence in our democracy.
- Due process – the basic rule of law – is critical to that confidence.
- That confidence was betrayed by this action.
- There is no excuse for this type of lawless action by the Governor.
- When Americans want fair elections, what could be worse?
- In May, the Rules Review Commission rejected the Board of Elections’ efforts to weaken these laws.
- So their proposals were rejected by the administrative process.
- Now the Governor is suing to disband the Rules Review Commission, which we have had in place since 1986.
- A three-judge panel upheld the witness requirement this month.
- A federal judge also upheld most of the election issues involved in this so-called settlement, including the witness requirement.
- So they were rejected by the judicial process.
- If this so-called “consent agreement” were a real judicial order based on the merits, we could debate that decision, and appeal.
- But that’s not what this is.
- This is not a decision by a judge, or a lawmaker.
- This is a decision by Democratic Party attorneys in DC.
- This is literally our elected leaders allowing one political party’s attorneys to rewrite state law as they prefer.
- This is official action without any constitutional justification.
- This “sue-and-settle” scam is a disgrace to American due process.
- We have honestly never heard of any other state or federal lawmakers trying this “sue-and-settle” sham.
- We are seeking examples of this ever being attempted before.
- Why has it never been done? It betrays their oath of office.
- The attorney for the “plaintiffs,” Marc Elias, was Cooper’s attorney during his contested recount with Gov. McCrory.
- Josh Stein was the keynote speaker at the “North Carolina Alliance for Retired Americans Annual Convention” in 2018.
- That event was held here in Raleigh. Guess what the topic was?Elections.
- This brazen attempt to circumvent every conceivable due process in our state government is the act of a desperate party.
- Knowing their radical agenda will be rejected by North Carolina voters who want jobs and safety, Democrats hatched this plan.
- Our state courts are not a forum for fake lawmaking.
- We are confident the federal courts will agree.
- This is the act of a Governor who has not stood in a room and taken questions from press like this in six months.
- We are here, we hold these regularly, you can talk to us.
- We were accessible throughout the legislative session.
- This consent agreement must be withdrawn, and Governor Cooper should answer for it at a press conference with real live questions.
What does the consent agreement do?
- Rewriting the statutory deadline for the receipt of absentee ballots from 2 days after the election to 9 days after the election.
- Note: The State Board of Elections cannot unilaterally rewrite specific details of state law.
- This was rejected by the Rules Review Commission.
- Subverting the absentee ballot witness requirement agreed to in the Bipartisan Elections Act of 2020.
- The press release from the state board claims that the witness requirement is in place—that is a lie.
- An unwitnessed ballot will now be counted, in direct contravention of state law, if the purported voter just fills out a piece of paper.
- · Witness requirements helped detect the 9th Congressional District election fraud and now that tool is gone.
- Rewriting the statutory definition of “postmark” to allow for more ballots to be counted
- Note: The State Board of Elections cannot unilaterally rewrite specific provisions of state law.
- Now, we could be waiting for weeks for the election to be settled.
- Weakening protections against ballot harvesting
- If a ballot is dropped off illegally by a harvester, all the state board is going to do is take their name and address, effectively looking the other way.
- If a ballot is found in an unsecured area without any interaction with the state board, that is going to be ignored as well and that ballot is going to count.
- This is open invitation to fraud.
###