Block, Siteadmin, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, delete, edit, move, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, protect, rollback, Administrators, template
294,262
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 150:
Line 150: − +
→Depriving poll-watchers of their right to observe the count
Other counties — such as Lancaster, York, Westmoreland, and Berks Counties — “did not contact voters who submitted defective ballots or give them an opportunity to cure. They simply followed the law and treated these ballots as invalid and refused to count them.”
Other counties — such as Lancaster, York, Westmoreland, and Berks Counties — “did not contact voters who submitted defective ballots or give them an opportunity to cure. They simply followed the law and treated these ballots as invalid and refused to count them.”
{{quotebox-float|“Because the counties that followed state law and did not provide a cure process are heavily Republican (and counties that violated state law and did provide a cure process are heavily Democratic), Defendants’ conduct harmed the Trump Campaign. It deprived the President of lawful votes and awarded his opponent with unlawful votes.”}}
{{quotebox-float|“Because the counties that followed state law and did not provide a cure process are heavily Republican (and counties that violated state law and did provide a cure process are heavily Democratic), Defendants’ conduct harmed the Trump Campaign. It deprived the President of lawful votes and awarded his opponent with unlawful votes.”}}
====Depriving poll-watchers of their right to observe the count====
====680,770 estimated ballots processed with no observers====
The lawsuit cites many examples in which election officials prevented poll-watchers from observing the counting of votes, as required by state law.
The lawsuit cites many examples in which election officials prevented poll-watchers from observing the counting of votes, as required by state law.