The ‘sleeper case’ trying to stop Trump and the RNC from intimidating voters and poll workers

By Devan Cole, CNN

September 12, 2024

—

A nearly four-year-old legal effort by Black voters to convince a court to prevent former President Donald Trump and the Republican Party from potentially intimidating voters and poll workers is quietly coming back to life as the 2024 election approaches.

First brought in the days following the 2020 election, the lawsuit has moved slowly through the federal courts in Washington, DC, as Trump’s claims of presidential immunity from civil lawsuits were being litigated. It coincidently haslanded before US District Judge Tanya Chutkan, the judge handling the federal election subversion charges against Trump.

But now, the case is beginning to show signs of movement.

The case could have enormous implications for this election and future ones: The voters are asking a federal judge to put Trump, his campaign and the Republican National Committee under court supervision that would require them to seek pre-approval before “engaging in any activities related to recounts, certifications, or similar post-election activities,” and to bar the defendants from intimidating voters, poll workers and other election officials.

If the plaintiffs ultimately prevail, their victory could provide them with a significant deterrence against potential intimidation and harassment of election workers and voters from Republicans as Trump and his allies signal that they will again try to undermine the results of the election.

The type of supervision sought by the voters is not new for the Republican Party: The GOP had previously been under a court-ordered consent decree from the early 1980s until 2017 that barred it from engaging in practices that could intimidate or discriminate against Black voters.

Rajiv Parikh, an attorney who represented the Democratic Party during part of the long-running case against the RNC that resulted in the now-expired consent decree, said courts play a critical role in preventing the type of intimidation that the Black voters are alleging occurred during the 2020 election.

“Just because your intention isn’t to discriminate against a group or to intimidate somebody, if what you do has the effect of doing that, then it really is going to be up to a court as an independent arbiter of what’s appropriate or what’s not to decide that,” he said.

At the heart of the lawsuit are claims by Black voters in Michigan that the defendants worked together in 2020 to unlawfully disenfranchise them and other voters in “major metropolitan areas with large Black voter populations” through “disrupting vote counting efforts, lodging groundless challenges during recounts, and attempting to block certification of election results through intimidation and coercion of election officials and volunteers.”

In doing so, the lawsuit alleges, the defendants violated the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and the Ku Klux Klan Act, a Reconstruction-era law passed to combat violence by the White supremacist group and allow people to take civil action against individuals who “conspire to prevent by force, intimidation, or threat,” participation in US elections.

Attorneys for Trump and the RNC have asked to dismiss the case, saying any conduct at issue constitutes protected political speech.

“This is simply a transparent attempt to quell political dissent and chill political speech,” a lawyer for Trump and his campaign wrote in a filing last year. “Even assuming all the allegations are true, President Trump and his Campaign engaged in simple and straightforward political speech during an important political dispute.”

Chutkan has yet to make any substantial rulings in the matter. She was randomly assignedthe pivotal case last October, receiving it months after she started overseeing the criminal case brought by special counsel Jack Smith against Trump. Weeks later, the judge stressed the need to have “some forward motion” in the civil matter as the nation barreled toward the presidential election. (Sure, right, we believe the BS Judge that can't prosecute Trump now, will make the right decision.)

“It’s been pending for a long time. At a certain point, a failure to decide means that it effectively denies the plaintiffs their remedy,” Chutkan said during a hearing in late November.

https://www.cnn.com/2024/09/12/politics/sleeper-case-rnc-trump-voter-intimidation/index.html

STRAPPED? What Kind of Gun Does Kamala Own? KEK

4:01

https://youtu.be/Y-lvJf2aT2o

Jewish Groups Issue Travel Warning About Massachusetts County Where Man Charged in Self-Defense Shooting

Cam Edwards| September 16, 2024

Three Jewish organizations have issued a travel warning and are calling for an economic boycott of Middlesex County, Massachusetts after a pro-Israel demonstrator was charged with assault and battery after shooting a man who attacked him during a rally last week. Betar USA, Magen Herut Canada, and Shields of David say until all charges are dropped against Scott Hayes, Americans should stay away from the county in the Boston suburbs, including the town of Newton where the attack took place.

Michael Sinensky, Executive Director of Betar USA said, “These are dangerous times in America for those who stand with Israel. When a decorated Iraq War veteran and American citizen is prosecuted for defending himself against an individual who attacked him and openly supports a terrorist organization, it sends a chilling message: Middlesex County is not a safe place for anyone who values liberty, justice, and security.

"District Attorney Marian Ryan must know and understand this case is much larger than Scott Hayes. This case sends a chilling message to all Americans they cannot protect themselves in Massachusetts if attacked.

"We urge all Americans to stand with us, refuse to visit, and withhold their spending in all towns in Middlesex county, including Newton, Massachusetts, until this gross miscarriage of justice is corrected.

"We are in touch with community members, Rabbis and leaders these areas. We expect to have representatives in the courtroom and in the area for any future court appearances.

"We expect other organizations to join our call to action and will commence an advertising and marketing campaign calling on Americans to avoid visiting until charges against Hayes are dropped.”

Hayes, meanwhile, has seen an outpouring of support since he was charged with shooting the pro-Palestinian supporter Caleb Gannon, who ran across the street and tackled Hayes during the pro-Israel demonstration in Newton last week. A GoFundMe set up to support Hayes in his legal battle has raised nearly $250,000 over the past couple of days, with more than 3,500 people donating.

Hayes was released on bail after his arraignment on Friday, and prosecutors say Gannon has been charged with assault and battery as well. But attorney Glenn MacKinlay, who's representing Hayes, says his client never should have been charged in the first place, calling his actions a "textbook case of self-defense."

Hayes' supporters said he's not Jewish but often attends pro-Israel rallies. They said he's a peaceful person, a single father and a decorated veteran of the Iraq War.

"He was standing peacefully and attacked and the notion that all of us could be attacked at any time just for standing out for what we believe in is horrifying," said Aylit Schultz.

Supporters say it's not just a case of self-defense but an act of antisemitism that has left them fearful.

"For the first time in my life, I'm afraid to be Jewish," said Aduna Troen. "What kind of world is that?"

Hayes was released on $5,000 bail, which was raised by his supporters. He must wear a GPS monitor on weekends, has a curfew during the week, has to stay away from Gannon and Newton and not carry any firearms.

It's utterly ridiculous, in my opinion, that Hayes is still facing charges after prosecutors have had the chance to view video of the attack, which clearly shows Gannon running across the street and hurling himself at Hayes, sending both men to the ground before Gannon put Hayes in a chokehold.

There was only one aggressor in this case, and he was shot after attacking a stranger who was lawfully exercising his First Amendment rights. After the shooting, Hayes and other demonstrators even attempted to render aid to Gannon. Now this veteran is facing felony charges for defending himself from his assailant.

We already know that Massachusetts has some of the worst gun laws in the nation, but the right to defend yourself still exists… at least on paper. Unless prosecutors drop these charges, however, it's going to be up to a jury to prove that self-defense isn't a prohibited activity.

Cam Edwards has covered the 2nd Amendment for 20 years as a broadcast and online journalist, as well as serving on the board of directors for the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms. He lives outside of Farmville, Virginia with his family, three dogs, two barn cats, a flock of chickens, and an undisclosed number of firearms for their protection.

https://bearingarms.com/camedwards/2024/09/16/jewish-groups-issue-travel-warning-about-massachusetts-county-where-man-charged-in-self-defense-shooting-n1226239#google_vignette