Maricopa County Superior Court Judge David Gass has tossed a lawsuit from a Tucson, Arizona voter ch

[Gothmog]

Source: ThinkProgress

Maricopa County Superior Court Judge David Gass has tossed a lawsuit from a Tucson, Arizona voter challenging the March 22 presidential primary, which was marred by confusion, 5-hour lines, and rampant errors.

Judge Gass noted that while “glitches are always something that we need to wary of and we need to work hard, and we need to fix them…they don’t rise to the level of fraud.” He declined the litigant’s request to have the results of the election — big wins for Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton — thrown out.

“I can’t find that one, there were illegal votes and two…I can’t find it would have made a difference in the outcome of the election,” he said. “The election would have been the same.” The judge added that re-doing the election wouldn’t be fair to the more than 1 million Arizonans who did manage to cast a ballot in March.

Another lawsuit filed by the campaigns of Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton continues, demanding the U.S. District Court of Phoenix review why the county cut the number of available polling places from 200 to 60, leaving only one voting center for every 21,000 voters. That lawsuit, which is joined by the Democratic National Committee, the Arizona Democratic Party, the president of the Navajo Nation, and the campaign of Ann Kirkpatrick, also slams the “state’s arbitrary rejection of provisional ballots at alarming rates, especially those cast by Hispanic voters.”

Read more: http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2016/04/27/3773073/arizona-lawsuit-tossed/

---

This lawsuit was poorly drafted and had no chance.

[Iliyah]

1. WOW

[bkkyosemite]

2. It's not fair to those who could not vote!

[JunkYardDogg]

3. No evidence of fraud-without an investigation?

And the 50,000 people who were either removed from the voter rolls or had their party affiliation switched without their consent?
This is a wholesale, country wide operation to eviscerate the election process in America.
It is totally irrelevant whether the outcome would be changed, it is whether crimes were committed which effected the outcome of the "election"

[hack89]

8. Courts don't investigate.

they adjudicate law based on the evidence brought before them. Basic civics.

[JunkYardDogg]

9. I know

Actually, the Judge dismissed the case because the plaintiff , as determined by the Judge, was not an expert, he did not have published, peer reviewed papers, etc.

[SkyDaddy7]

7. No, that is not what happened. LOL!

Both the Clinton & Sanders campaign joined in the lawsuit filed by the Democratic Party after it was filed.

...And before you go off the rails about me being some shill for Hillary I've been a big Bernie supporter since day one, donated to his campaign several times & voted for him in Georgia...The difference is I'm HONEST!

This is a Democratic Party vs Republican issue in Arizona!

[Gothmog]

5. Judge tosses lawsuit challenging Arizona presidential primary results

Here is some more on this ruling http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/elections/2016/04/26/judge-tosses-lawsuit-challenging-arizona-presidential-primary-results/83561630/

After two days of testimony, a Maricopa County Superior Court judge dismissed a lawsuit filed to invalidate the March Arizona presidential preference election.

The suit was filed against Secretary of State Michele Reagan and every Arizona county by attorney Michael Kielsky on behalf of a Tucson man named John Brakey, who says his occupation is "election integrity activist." In their pleadings, they alleged that voter-registration requests were mishandled and the number of polling places in Maricopa County was improperly cut.

Hearings Monday and Tuesday were to determine if there was legal cause to go forward with trial.

The state and the counties countered that the complaint was neither timely nor adequately prepared. And they questioned whether election law applied to presidential preference elections. Judge David Gass took the matter under advisement but allowed the evidentiary hearing to go forward.....

Brakey himself asked to testify as an expert witness in the case, but said under cross-examination that he had no formal computer or legal training and that he had not published peer-reviewed books or articles on the subject. He was denied the chance to testify as an expert.

"These are always emotional issues," Gass said. "Elections are human endeavors; they are never perfect."

"Otherwise, what we face is trying to undo an election," he said. Gass acknowledged that the number of polling places was inadequate — some voters stood in line for 5½ hours — but said that such issues should be worked out ahead of time.

After the hearing, Brakey said he did not intend to appeal the ruling.

It is never a good sign when your named plaintiff wants to testify as an expert witness when he is not an expert

[apnu]

6. Judge in heavy Republican county with gerrymandered districts

rules in favor of the republican fuckup that is Arizona.

Why am I not surprised by this?