News Release
The time has finally arrived for the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to hear oral arguments regarding the issue of “Standing” in EIPCa’s lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of California’s election process for future elections.
If you would like to listen to the proceedings, |
The attorneys for the defendants (the state, and the 13 counties) and the attorney for the plaintiffs (EIPCa and the 13 congressional candidates) have submitted extensive written briefs to the court.
This Oral Arguments proceeding will be short (approximately 20 minutes). It provides an opportunity for the judges to ask questions of the attorneys and for the attorneys to provide any additional arguments not included in their briefs.
After another few weeks of deliberation, the judges will announce their decision regarding EIPCa’s “Standing“ to prosecute our suit. A favorable ruling will remand the case back to the District Court, and Discovery and Audits may begin. An unfavorable ruling will require appeal to a higher court.
Oral Arguments Calendar:
Richard H. Chambers US Court of Appeals, Pasadena
September 23, 2022 – 9:30am
Before the Court:
- Sandra Ikuta – Circuit Judge nominated by George W. Bush
- Danielle Forrest – Circuit Judge nominated by Donald J. Trump
- Holly A. Thomas – Circuit Judge nominated by Joe Biden
EIPCa will send a link the day before the proceedings to those who sign up.
Use this link to read the entire complaint.
Following are the first 4 points of the complaint:
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Case 2:21-cv-00032-AB-MAA
NATURE OF THE ACTION
- Election integrity and transparency are critical for the enfranchisement of every eligible voter, regardless of party or political view.While many recent election cases have focused solely on the outcome of the November 2020 election, this suit primarily challenges California’s unconstitutional election process for future elections.
This process includes near-universal vote-by-mail (“VBM”) balloting, while eliminating chain-of-custody and signature verification protections, treating in-person voters differently from VBM voters, and sending ballots to large numbers of ineligible voters.
This endangers many of California’s most vulnerable populations, including the young, the elderly, and non-citizens. It has also led to pervasive irregularities in the election process that threaten to disenfranchise California voters.
- Our Constitutional Republic is founded on the sacred right of every eligible citizen to cast an equal vote to determine who will represent him or her in government.The Constitution of the United States guarantees this right through the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment and, in the case of Federal congressional elections, through the Elections Clause (Art. I, § 4, cl. 1).
It also “guarantee[s] to every State . . . a Republican Form of Government, and protect[ion] . . . against Invasion. (Art. IV, § 4.)
- Over the past three decades in California, however, these rights have been intentionally eroded by an onslaught of unconstitutional statutes, regulations, executive orders, and voting practices which, taken together, are designed to create an environment in which elections could be manipulated and eligible voters of all political viewpoints disenfranchised.
- This is not a partisan issue but a United States Constitutional one. Nor is it an issue that affects just one candidate or just one election. It is an issue that must be remedied to ensure the integrity of future elections for all citizens.
EIPCa is a nonpartisan 501(c)(3) charity. Contributions are tax deductible.
TELL YOUR FRIENDS ABOUT CITIZENS JOURNAL Please keep us publishing – DONATE