CALIFORNIA (June 16, 2021) – The Non-Partisan Election Integrity Project® California and 13 congressional candidates intend to take their fight for fair and honest elections in California to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
The plaintiffs in EIPCa, et al. v. Weber, et al. (Central District of California Case No. 2:21-cv-32-AB-MAA) are challenging laws, regulations and election practices that have undermined California election integrity, creating an environment ripe for irregularities. The plaintiffs filed the lawsuit after Election Integrity Project® California collected over 700 sworn affidavits from trained citizen observers which described various irregularities during the fall 2020 general election in California. The complaint also examines how California laws like ballot harvesting, and last-minute changes like privileging vote-by-mail voting over in-person voting, disadvantaged minority groups.
On June 15, 2021, the federal trial court granted defendants’ motions to dismiss the case without ruling on the facts, paving the way for plaintiffs’ appeal to the Ninth Circuit. “This is a potentially groundbreaking case that challenges the blatantly unconstitutional election practices taking place in California and increasingly, in other parts of the country” said Linda Paine, President of Election Integrity Project® California. “Unlike other recent election cases, it is forward looking, seeking to create a fair, honest and transparent election process for all future elections.” Plaintiffs intend to file the notice of appeal within several weeks.
Santa Clarita, California (June 22, 2021)-- California’s November 3, 2020 election was marred by significant voting and registration irregularities, according to Election Integrity Project® California, Inc. (EIPCa). The non-partisan organization analyzed the state’s official voter list of February 9, 2021 and reported its findings to California’s Secretary of State Shirley Weber on June 17, 2021. This followed EIPCa reports of 2020 cross-state voting on April 30 and May 18, 2021 that the Secretary has ignored. EIPCa’s June report cites California’s election code that requires officials to provide timely answers to citizens’ questions.
EIPCa seeks answers to the following questions, on behalf of California voters:
|
VoteCal Database Date |
# Counties with Registrations Exceeding # Eligible Citizens |
Total Ineligible Registrations |
|
March 2020 |
11 |
1,063,957 |
|
February 2021 |
23 |
1,834,789 (+72% since 3/20) |
“Many in the nation are questioning the validity of the 2020 general election in their states”, said EIPCa President Linda Paine. “Mass irregularities in California’s registration and voting numbers continue to erode voter confidence here and we are hopeful Secretary Weber will immediately address our questions.”
Santa Clarita, Calif. - On Tuesday, July 6, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the state of Arizona’s right to protect the integrity of its voting process. The Democratic National Committee had challenged Arizona’s policy that prohibited ballot harvesting and Arizona’s requirement that in-person voters cast their vote at their designated precinct. The Supreme Court concluded that these measures are important in ensuring a fair and accurate election and that Arizona did not violate the Voting Rights Act by enforcing them.
Non-partisan Election Integrity Project California (EIPCa) and Election Integrity Project Arizona (EIPAz), together with attorney Mike O’Neil of Landmark Legal Foundation filed an influential friend of the court brief informing the Court of the dangers of ballot harvesting.
EIPCa’s extensive work documenting the many failures of the California electoral system allowed it to provide a unique perspective of what occurs without important protections, such as the chain-of-custody of vote-by-mail ballots, as well as oversight by diligent election officials.
Last year, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that prohibiting ballot harvesting and requiring in-person voters to cast their vote at their designated precinct violated the Voting Rights Act in that they disproportionately affected minority voters and were enacted with discriminatory intent.
Thursday, the Supreme Court disagreed and overruled the 9th Circuit. Their decision ruled that federal law does not deprive states like Arizona of their authority to establish non-discriminatory voting rules to protect the sanctity of the vote nor did the Arizona legislature act with discriminatory intent when it enacted the policies.
Justice Alito, writing for the majority, noted that states have a legitimate interest in preventing voter fraud and that these policies work to prevent such fraud. “Fraud can affect the outcome of a close election, and fraudulent votes dilute the right of citizens to cast ballots that carry appropriate weight,” the Court continued. “Fraud can also undermine public confidence in the fairness of elections and the perceived legitimacy of the announced outcome.”
Equally important, the Court found that “[e]nsuring that every vote is cast freely, without intimidation or undue influence, is [a] valid and important state interest.”
“We are heartened the Supreme Court has concluded that states have a right to enact commonsense laws that protect the integrity of the election process, thereby restoring the public’s faith in election outcomes,” said Linda Paine, EIPCa President. “Ballot harvesting removes the chain of custody protection allowing harvesters to seek out ballots that will be favorable to one side or another,” Linda went on to say. “It is EIPCa’s major objective that California follow Arizona’s lead and begin to take steps to correct the many electoral vulnerabilities that have plagued our great state for years.”
Election Integrity Project®California (EIPCa) and 13 Congressional Candidates filed a lawsuit California challenging the unconstitutional laws, policies & procedures, emergency regulations that destroy integrity in the election process.
###
Step-by-step for most of the last three decades, California’s legislature has slowly implemented a wellthought-
out progression of laws that work synergistically to erode any semblance of election integrity in
the state. The erosion and ultimate destruction of the California Republic is the end game of the Golden
State Agenda.
The swift progress of the Agenda was made possible by the intentional failure of the federal government to enforce the good elements of laws designed to protect the electoral process (NVRA and HAVA). In addition, Congress has remained selectively deaf, dumb and blind to the obvious defects in these laws and to the critical necessity of updating them to account for changing times and political environments.
Emboldened by its federal counterparts, California’s executive and judicial branches began a slow decline into electoral anarchy by refusing to enforce many of the state laws that stood between the right of their citizens to fairly choose those who would govern them and the desire of the elite to cement their complete and permanent control of electoral results.
Starting in 1998, the California legislature began in earnest to implement the Agenda.
The Constitutions of all 50 states mandate that voting is a privilege given ONLY to legal citizens. California’s election code guarantees every registered citizen ONE, privately cast, uninfluenced vote that is accurately tabulated.
Nevertheless, the implementation of the Agenda has paved the way for these guarantees to be circumvented, allowing the potential of unlawful votes and weakening in many ways the integrity of lawful ballots cast. The results are: