#ElectionLaw

[inexable]

Nebraska's Electoral Dilemma

The effort to shift Nebraska's electoral vote system to a winner-takes-all model has hit a wall, with Governor Jim Pillen and GOP officials unable to secure the necessary votes. This change, seen as beneficial for former President Trump, remains contentious. Should Nebraska stick with its unique proportional system, or would a winner-takes-all approach better reflect the voter’s will? Is electoral system reform ever truly neutral, or does it inherently serve political ends? What are your thoughts on the potential impacts of such a change? Let's discuss!

[rethinking-the-dollar]

Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer's signing of Senate bills 603 and 604, aimed at modernizing election processes, has sparked controversy and concerns about undermining election integrity by limiting investigative powers and raising barriers to recounts.

[barelawindia]

Election laws

Authored By: Harpreet Kaur Democracy is one of the fundamental inalienable features of the Indian Constitution and is part of the constitutional framework. The concept of democracy, as expressed in the Constitution, presupposes a method of election that represents the people in Congress and state legislatures. Read more: https://www.barelaw.in/election-laws-barelaw/ visit our website at www.barelaw.in #BareLaw #elections #Election2024 #electionlaw

[voiceofactivist]

THE GIG IS UP. “Malignant Allegations Getting Annoying.(MAGA)”SDWJR ......If Pres.Trump knew these where the same group following him from State to State he wouldn’t called the election results a fraud. He would’ve known the gig is up. #foc #trumpsupporters #stopthecount #electionpolls #frauds #voter #confusion #electionlaw #counteveryvote #presidentialelection #friendzofculture #sdwjr https://www.instagram.com/p/CHWdgxTn7Z6/?igshid=kd29k239seik

[shivahadi]

#The Election Laws (Amendment) Bill 2021, piloted by Law Minister Kiren Rijiju, was passed by a voice vote after a brief discussion during which some opposition members demanded that it be referred to a parliamentary panel for scrutiny. The law minister said that the bill will cleanse the election system and eliminate multiple entries. Most of the opposition members demanded that the Bill may be referred to the standing committee for scrutiny and detailed deliberations. Leader of Congress Adhir Ranjan Chowdhury and Supriya Sule of the NCP wondered why this important Bill was being pushed in a tearing hurry by the government. Many opposition members suggested for garnering public opinion on such an important legislation. This is no way to pass a legislation and there should be a proper debate and discussion on this, said N K Premchandran of the RSP. Others who opposed the Bill included Ritesh Pandey (BSP), Kalyan Banerjee (TMC), Asaduddin Owaisi (AIMIM) and E T Mohammed Basheer. #Electionlaws #BJP #Aadhaar #Parliamentwintersession #india #visionforcitizens #citizensconnected (at India) https://www.instagram.com/p/CXwOwjiPjvlBH5QBhjWZI-9Pq6o8tiWrx-m3cY0/?utm_medium=tumblr

[theconnectsean-blog]

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Sean Williams (@theconnectsean)

This is #amerikkka #georgia #electionlaws #johnlewisvotingrightsact #racists #endthefilibuster (at Atlanta, Georgia) https://www.instagram.com/p/CQjclCcHKq7/?utm_medium=tumblr

[scribesandvibes]

#incaseyallforgot, we ain’t forget when #thesecretaryofstate deemed it ethical to oversee his own #election.

since ye wanna talk #votersuppression, how ‘bout we revisit that brian kemp vs #StaceyAbrams [@staceyabrams] election…

if ye wanna talk #FairCount [ig: @faircount], why are republicans recruiting volunteers for the #georgiarecount?

if the #georgiasecretaryofstate was accountable for overseeing #voterfraud and enforcing #electionlaws when ya’ll stole that election, what are we to expect when gop fanatics are allowed to handle the #handrecount?

all i could say is #aintnomoreplayinga! #everyvotecounts, #EVERYVOTEMATTERS, and #thesouthhassomethingtosay. ✌

ya’ll not gon’ continue to be out here stealing elections, taking #voterrights away.

#itsanewday and #wethepeople have used our collective voice to restore hope.

in fact, we could’nt be more prouder…

yet, if you were born in 2003 and are turning 18 by 1/5/2021, you eligible to vote in the #runoffelection, be sure to #registertovote.

it’s time to get LOUDER.

-Stevie #scribesandvibes #adifferentkindofvibe #unorthodoxtribe | #votervibes

https://www.instagram.com/p/CHfWDncBjCw/?igshid=tyq2z8bd8v3t

[acton27]

Interesting. #electionlaw #politics

[shalasalazar1975-blog]

January, 20 2017-Here we go...

[americanmysticom]

”LOOKS LIKE TRUMP WON THE ELECTION” 2020 Election Crisis—What YOU Can Do To Save The Election!

Our most recent research in September revealed that 353 U.S. counties had 1.8 million more registered voters than eligible voting-age citizens. In other words, the registration rates of those counties exceeded 100% of eligible voters!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xl8fhRHoU4M&ab_channel=JudicialWatch

https://www.judicialwatch.org/

electionlaw@judicialwatch.org

reach your congress and state legislators;

https://www.govtrack.us/

https://www.congress.gov/state-legislature-websites

[maxwellyjordan]

Introducing the 2020 Election Litigation Tracker

20 years ago this fall, a hotly contested presidential election led to 36 days of legal turmoil that culminated with the Supreme Court’s ruling in Bush v. Gore. This year, as America prepares to vote during the coronavirus pandemic, the Supreme Court once again may shape the outcome of a presidential election.

It could do so in a couple of ways. The expected surge in voting by mail increases the chance that the result will be inconclusive on election night, because many ballots may remain untallied. That would set the stage for targeted post-election litigation over ballot-counting procedures – essentially a reprise of Bush v. Gore. But even ignoring the potential for post-election litigation, the lower courts are grappling right now with hundreds of pre-election lawsuits, many of them seeking or challenging modifications to voting procedures in light of the pandemic. A few of these lawsuits already have reached the Supreme Court on an emergency basis, and more are likely to do so in the coming weeks. The justices’ rulings in these cases could determine how – or whether – millions of Americans vote this fall.

That is why SCOTUSblog is collaborating with experts from Election Law at Ohio State to provide up-to-date information on significant election-related cases as they progress through the court system. Our 2020 Election Litigation Tracker, which we launch today, contains plain-English case summaries, primary documents and links to news coverage at SCOTUSblog and elsewhere. It also includes expert-written explainers on some of the arcane aspects of election law – like the Purcell principle and the Anderson-Burdick doctrine – that could become part of America’s vocabulary this fall, just as “hanging chads” did in 2000.

This is an unusual project for SCOTUSblog. We don’t normally cover litigation before it reaches the Supreme Court. But in the election law context, cases typically reach the justices in an emergency posture and must be litigated at high speed. That means these momentous cases often do not get the benefit of oral argument, full briefing and lengthy deliberation by the justices. And because of how quickly the cases arise, the legal community, the press and the public often lack access to reliable, nonpartisan information about how the cases got to the justices and what issues are at stake. That’s the problem our 2020 Election Litigation Tracker aims to solve. It is not a comprehensive database of all election-related lawsuits. Rather, it is a resource on the cases that are most likely to land on the desks of the justices shortly before – or shortly after – Election Day. When they do, they should not come as a surprise.

We thank the team at Election Law at Ohio State – especially Edward Foley, Steven Huefner, Matt Cooper and Gillian Thomson – for their invaluable collaboration. And we want to hear from readers. We’ll be continuously adding new content to the tracker, so if there’s something you’d like to see, or a case you think we should be covering, just email us. SCOTUSblog can be reached at feedback@scotusblog.com, and the Ohio State team can be reached at electionlaw@osu.edu.

The post Introducing the 2020 Election Litigation Tracker appeared first on SCOTUSblog.

from Law https://www.scotusblog.com/2020/09/introducing-the-2020-election-litigation-tracker/ via http://www.rssmix.com/

[inthemomemt]

1/ Currently, #Wisconin is at the forefront of the #KanyeConJob being perpetrated by #ConManDon and Trump's sycophants. I'm an #ElectionLaw attorney, read the complaints on behalf of the @ProjectLincoln and here are my takeaways.#Election2020https://t.co/6eRLsnlPjG

— Mario Nicolais, Esq (@MarioNicolaiEsq) August 9, 2020

[automatismoateo]

TIL that 13 states allow you to have a driver's license without a photo on religious grounds via /r/atheism

Submitted October 07, 2019 at 09:37AM by O1O1O1O (Via reddit https://ift.tt/30QKda8) TIL that 13 states allow you to have a driver's license without a photo on religious grounds

Today I saw someone complaining that an online identification service required them to upload a photo of them holding their driver's license containing their photo. This, they said, violated their religious beliefs. When asked what specific religion they held they said it was "Bruja". They claimed they didn't actually need a photo to get a driver's license. This was not a religion I've ever heard of, but hey, there's at least 2,000 gods out there so who am I to think I would know them all. As best I can tell it's a south American witchcraft thing. Well I think so, because I didn't see anything from other Bruja complaining about having their photo taken.

Anyway this lead me to start searching to see if you really need a photo to get a driver's license. I came across reports of the woman Kaye Beach who sued the state of Oklahoma to have her driver's license without a photo because it offended her religious sensibilities - specifically it would give her the mark of the beast... https://www.biometricupdate.com/201307/oklahoma-woman-sues-over-mark-of-the-beast-drivers-license-requirements

Then I eventually found that no less than thirteen states (Arkansas, Indiana, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, New Jersey, North Dakota, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Washington, and Wisconsin) allow people to cite religion and get a driver's license without a photo on: https://moritzlaw.osu.edu/electionlaw/litigation/documents/LWVJ.pdf and most don't even require demonstration or an affidavit that the person holds that religion.

What can I say other than the cliched... "Mind blown"

Just imagine if the non-religious tried to justify such scouting of the law based on non-faith based grounds? Imagine if we said "I'm sorry my lack of religion does not permit me to accept bullshit as a reason for anything" . Would 13 states blink and tell us "All righty then" and hand over a driver's license?

[diwangpalaboy]

DS 112 election and elite studies reading task

FAIR ELECTIONS ACT http://www.comelec.gov.ph/?r=References/RelatedLaws/ElectionLaws/OtherElectionLaws/RA9006 7 Ms OF DYNASTY BUILDING by Sheila Coronel https://pcij.org/stories/the-seven-ms-of-dynasty-building/