Federal Judge Devastates Trump & Rules To Protect Vote-By-Mail System


Since the election season began, Donald Trump has done his blustering, lying best to convince Americans that the vote-by-mail system is corrupt and rife with fraud. As such, the issue has been taken to court in numerous states and a number of judges ruling that there’s no evidence of mail-in voting fraud. Republicans, however, just keep trying.

Such was the case in Vermont, one of the few states that has a plan to mail out ballots to all registered voters. No one is being forced to vote by mail, however; in fact, voters can mail in their ballots, place them in a drop box, or simply bring them into a polling place on Election Day. A judge in Vermont who heard arguments from a group who insist that mail-in ballots will ensure an unfair election determined that there’s no proof to their claims.

The Associated Press reports that:

‘A federal court judge on Wednesday rejected a challenge to Vermont’s plan to mail ballots to all of the state’s active voters so they can cast ballots by mail or in person for the November election.

‘In a one-page judgment filed Wednesday, U.S. District Court Judge Geoffrey Crawford denied the motion for a preliminary injunction to block the system and he dismissed the lawsuit filed by five Vermonters.’

Although the decision was handed down on Wednesday, the group who brought their case to court have 30 days to file an appeal, which would change the rules just 17 days before Election Day. Until then, voters in Vermont can plan to vote in several different ways and officials can begin counting votes early.

‘Voters may return the ballot by mail or drop it off at their town clerk’s office early, or bring it to the polls on Election Day…

‘Town and city clerks may begin processing the ballots 30 days prior to the election, including feeding them into vote tabulating machines or storing them securely until they can be counted by hand on election night.’

The group of plaintiffs argued that the vote-by-mail system is so flawed that their own votes would be “diluted” in the chaos and potential fraud, but a judge determined that their arguments weren’t up to the standards considered by the courts as a legal argument.

‘The lawsuit that sought to block the system argued that a ballot cast improperly — whether on purpose or otherwise — would violate the Constitutional rights of Vermonters by “diluting” their votes.

‘“We’re focused on harm to the individual,” David Warrington, the attorney representing the people challenging the system said during a Tuesday hearing before Crawford. “That is a harm that is concrete. That is addressable by courts.”’