“Still angry”: Voters say they won’t forget that the North Carolina GOP tried to trash their ballots

Cobleland Rudolph Said because North Carolina state The challenge in the elections ended in the Supreme Court. Like tens of thousands of others, it swept the controversial litigation, spent about six months of frequency about whether its voting will be calculated or the judge of the Republican Court of Appeal. Jefferson Griffin You will succeed and put it off. But despite the failure of his efforts, Salon told that she was not very comfortable.

“I hope it is more comfortable than it is, frankly, because I know it is a temporary satisfaction,” said Ashlail’s resident in an interview over the phone, after I told Salon that her voting had been challenged despite the full registration of the voters. “I am still angry [about] The amount of energy, time and money made by Jefferson Griffin from this country, especially this society, with its own interest. “

She added: “I hope that he will get to know the other side: that I fired women in this state – that we have finished. We have finished nonsense.”

Earlier this month, the challenge of the Supreme Court elections in North Carolina ended with a privilege of Griffin, who initially asked the courts to throw more than 65,000 votes claiming to be invalid due to the records of incomplete voters. The November race lost due to the current justice Alison RegesDemocratic, only 734 points, which is a margin confirmed twice. With the progress of litigation, the number of votes that were stabbed in about 1,600 North Caroline states were reduced, but a federal judge eventually spent earlier this month that no of their votes could be deducted.

The American boycott judge, Richard Maires, wrote in his ruling: “The deprivation of voters of the essential right will lead to great hardship,” wrote the American boycott judge, Richard Maires. “The activation of the will of the voters will not lead to the lack of hardship similar to Judge Griffin. There is a huge public interest in protecting the” integrity of our electoral operations “, which is” necessary for the work of our participatory democracy. “

Griffin’s petitions against the North Carolina Electoral Council claimed that the Board of Directors illegally and illegally calculates votes from three groups of people: more than 60,000 votes, claimed, were made by voters who did not submit or have not been asked to provide identity numbers in the voter records; He argued that 5500 absent votes came from voters abroad and the army who failed to include the identity of the image. While another 200 votes came from people who knew themselves that they did not reside physically in North Carolina.

the May 5 Resolution From the United States, provincial judge Richard Mayers II, one of those appointed to the president Donald TrumpThe previous rulings were overturned by the Court of Appeal in North Carolina and the state’s Supreme Court and ordered the state election council to ratify the race. In early April, the Court of Appeal I ruled for GriffinImposing “treatment” periods for voters who claim incomplete records and voters abroad to provide missing information, and to deduct votes “no resident.” The Supreme Court of North Carolina later Ruling 60,000 “voters registration” vote cannot be canceled; However, the court extended the treatment period for voters abroad and the military who were placed abroad as being affected, while maintaining the voter voter “did not reside”.

In his 68 -page decision, Mayer wrote that the nullity of military and abroad voters after the elections violated their basic rights to the procedures, while the costly treatment process violates equal protection rights. Also, the lack of any notice or opportunity for eligible voters to challenge the naming of “residents” also ignore the rights of legal procedures for voters with the creation of an unconstitutional burden on the right to vote. He said that the court cannot overlook the attempt to “change the rules of the game after playing it.”

“You create the rules before the game,” Meers wrote. “You don’t change it after finishing the game.”

Richard Hason, the fictitious president of law at the University of California, Los Angeles, praised the rule of Mays as an “important statement” in the face of increasing attempts to sabotage the elections. Salon told that the changes proposed by the courts of the states that I proposed were rooted in “reading or distorting the election law” and that the treatment he agreed would have dealt with “voters who spend a similar position based on the place where they live in the state and how they are likely to vote.”

As such, “the state courts have set a dangerous precedent in allowing the candidate to request a retroactive trace of changing the hoping to change the results of the elections,” adding that he hopes that Maraz will rule a precedent for federal courts.

“We cannot rely on every court to do the right thing these days, especially in an atmosphere where conspiracy theories spread about voting on the right,” Hassan said. “However, we hope that you will maintain enough courts on democracy and the rule of law when it matters.”

Harvard’s law professor Nicholas Stefanopoulos, who includes his research in elections and constitutional law, told Salon that Griffin and North Carolina courts that ruled in his favor “basic principles in our electoral system”.

While Mairez’s rule was a “pleasant surprise”, Stefanopoulos said he did not expect Griffin’s effort to become a book for future candidates who seek to sabotage electoral defeat.

“As we just saw, conservative judges are unlikely to cast such efforts that fly against the principles of the basic election law,” said Stefanopoulos.

But John Parridz, a lawyer for the SPOM, the Protection of Democratic Protection, who has made a summary of the Federal Court on behalf of the North Carolina voters, noticed the “damage” of Griffin and the provisions of the state courts on the confidence of the public that the courts will follow the law.

“At the end of the day, this issue is not difficult for the facts or the law. The due legal procedures are legal procedures, and equal protection is equal protection, whether you are talking about federal law or North Carolina State Law,” he said to the salon. He continued, it is concerned that the state is close to obtaining an electoral result that was transferred by “post -election Schneghan.”

“It is worrying that the state courts are ready to go further,” said Barridz. “He undermines confidence that they will call balls and strikes fairly when there are party elections at stake.”

Myers stopped enforcing his rule for seven days to give Griffin the opportunity to appeal, but the latter will instead give up the race just two days after the referee has decreased.

“While I am not fully agreed with the analysis of the provincial court, I respect the court contract – just as I respected every judicial court that heard this case,” Griffin said. statement. “I will not appeal the court’s decision.”

It was right Inside the Capitol Building in North Carolina on Tuesday, after the election council was used to winning it.

Although the Federal Court eventually eliminated its interest, North Carolina’s voters have some of their meals of the way they were revealed, including that they need to be more feasible in protecting their voices.

Rudolf, residing in Atelier, had been achieved earlier this year that the voter registration request contained the definition information required to ensure that it cannot be stabbed again. To move forward, she said that she would avoid the absence vote and instead the vote personally whenever she can, in addition to documenting the voting process hard.

“The confrontation, once again, is a good fired, disciplined, well-organized-which started in the 1970s and 1980s-an authoritarian agenda, I think what you realize is” a brilliant success, while we are in the circular shooting squad for what could happen on the left, and the right is really in the march. “

Rachel Arnold, a resident of Greensburo, who previously told a voting salon that was challenged due to the voter registration request, has identified a similar action plan. Although it has already been fulfilled that the registration of voters was completed earlier this year, in the future, it will verify that the election council accepted its voting after all elections and examining the registration record of the voters regularly before the final registration dates and elections to ensure that they are not removed from the voter bases.

The 51 -year -old also said that she was updated and gained all her identity documents in the face of federal and state proposals that require qualified voters to provide evidence of documentary citizenship for registration to vote.

“I must be awake in making sure that what I can see is preserved and I hope God that I cannot do too,” she said, expressed concern that the challenge like Griffin will happen again.

Unlike Rudolph, Arnold said she felt justified by “amazing the sudden end to the epic.”

“We were right all the time that they were trying to change the rules after the truth [that] She said it was not fair for voters in North Carolina, “describing the final design as” the best possible result “of the North Caroline,” not because of who won, but because the rule of law has been supported.