Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsMarc Elias: We have moved to dismiss the GOP lawsuit in Georgia
Link to tweet
Tweet text:
Marc E. Elias
@marceelias
🚨We have moved to dismiss the GOP lawsuit in Georgia seeking to to stop the certification of presidential election results from certain Democratic counties.
🚨ALERT: NEW LAWSUIT IN GEORGIA
Latest lawsuit filed in Georgia challenging 2020 election results.
democracydocket.com
9:28 AM · Nov 14, 2020
Marc E. Elias
@marceelias
🚨We have moved to dismiss the GOP lawsuit in Georgia seeking to to stop the certification of presidential election results from certain Democratic counties.
🚨ALERT: NEW LAWSUIT IN GEORGIA
Latest lawsuit filed in Georgia challenging 2020 election results.
democracydocket.com
9:28 AM · Nov 14, 2020
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
4 replies, 957 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (21)
ReplyReply to this post
4 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Marc Elias: We have moved to dismiss the GOP lawsuit in Georgia (Original Post)
Nevilledog
Nov 2020
OP
Native
(5,936 posts)1. Great excerpt from the motion to dismiss -
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiffs Complaint asks this Court to selectively disenfranchise over two million Georgia voters living in several of the states most populous countiescounties that did not ultimately support Plaintiffs preferred presidential candidatebased on entirely unsupported voter fraudconspiracy theories. Plaintiffs implausible allegations are based exclusively on a few isolated, unsubstantiated calls to a voter hotline (the very definition of hearsay), citations to fringe news articles, disproven studies, and projected expert analysis that has not yet actually been prepared (and is itself contingent upon data that the Complaint acknowledges has yet to be finalized or obtained). Plaintiffs ask the Court to take them at their word that this speculation and imaginary expert analysis will, upon information and belief, eventually support their extraordinary and highly implausible allegations. None of this is sufficient to invoke this Courts jurisdiction or stateany recognized or plausible federal cause of action.
This case presents neither a cogent nor cognizable legal theory. To the extent Plaintiffs allege any injury, it is not sufficient to support standing. It is political theatre, pure and simple, part of a broader and deeply troubling effort presently playing out on a national stage, to attempt to use the judiciary to cast doubt on the outcome of the presidential election. Every other court confronted with these efforts has properly rejected them. This Court should do the same and dismiss Plaintiffs Complaint.
Plaintiffs Complaint asks this Court to selectively disenfranchise over two million Georgia voters living in several of the states most populous countiescounties that did not ultimately support Plaintiffs preferred presidential candidatebased on entirely unsupported voter fraudconspiracy theories. Plaintiffs implausible allegations are based exclusively on a few isolated, unsubstantiated calls to a voter hotline (the very definition of hearsay), citations to fringe news articles, disproven studies, and projected expert analysis that has not yet actually been prepared (and is itself contingent upon data that the Complaint acknowledges has yet to be finalized or obtained). Plaintiffs ask the Court to take them at their word that this speculation and imaginary expert analysis will, upon information and belief, eventually support their extraordinary and highly implausible allegations. None of this is sufficient to invoke this Courts jurisdiction or stateany recognized or plausible federal cause of action.
This case presents neither a cogent nor cognizable legal theory. To the extent Plaintiffs allege any injury, it is not sufficient to support standing. It is political theatre, pure and simple, part of a broader and deeply troubling effort presently playing out on a national stage, to attempt to use the judiciary to cast doubt on the outcome of the presidential election. Every other court confronted with these efforts has properly rejected them. This Court should do the same and dismiss Plaintiffs Complaint.
crickets
(25,952 posts)2. Get over it, losers. GA is BLUE. Hahahaha! nt
gratuitous
(82,849 posts)3. And who would have thought that going in?
Stacy Abrams is a goddess.
crickets
(25,952 posts)4. She really did stand by our state after her stolen election.
Instead of fading into the background to perhaps plan another electoral run, Stacey Abrams rolled up her sleeves and got to work on GA's problems with voter suppression and turnout. She has done a fantastic job, and GA will benefit enormously from her efforts.