“If voting is not secure then nothing is secure,” attorney states after vote counting machine lawsuit is dismissed
On Friday afternoon, Montgomery Circuit Judge Greg Griffin dismissed a lawsuit challenging the state of Alabama’s use of vote counting machines. He also dismissed a motion by the plaintiffs in the case for a preliminary injunction that would have led to the hand-counting of ballots in the general election on November 8. The plaintiffs released a statement afterward lamenting Judge Griffin’s decision to dismiss their lawsuit. “Steve Marshall, John Merrill, and the members of the electronic voting committee were provided a video of an electronic voting machine counting counterfeit ballots,” said plaintiffs’ attorney Melissa Isaak in a statement. “It was irrefutable that the machines were not functioning properly, and there has been no concern shown from any of these elected officials.” “In May of this year, John Merrill said that the “hardened” stand-alone computers used in the election “cannot be connected to the internet.” This was shown in court to be false as Wifi and Bluetooth connectivity was specifically requested in Merrill’s own purchase orders,” Isaak continued. “Plaintiffs presented the world’s top cyber security experts who testified that Alabama’s electronic voting systems are NOT secure, and even if not connected to the internet, they can still be hacked.” “We showed without dispute or opposition that the voting equipment to be used in the 2022 primary did not work properly but accepted fake ballots,” plaintiffs’ attorney Jay Hinton said. “Yet, the state used them anyway. We will continue to fight for all Alabama voters to make sure that their votes are ‘counted’ in a constitutional way.” “Voter security is the most important issue of our time. If voting is not secure – then nothing is secure,” said plaintiffs’ attorney Phillip Jauregui said. “We brought our nation’s best experts into court, and they proved that our voting systems are insecure, uncertified, and accept fake ballots. We believe the Alabama Supreme Court will apply the law to the shocking facts in this case and protect our voting rights.” Jauregui’s comments suggest that the plaintiffs intend to appeal Judge Griffin’s ruling. The plaintiffs in the lawsuit were Focus on America, former gubernatorial candidate Lindy Blanchard, State Rep. Tommy Hanes, and Dr. David Calderwood. Blanchard later stepped away from the lawsuit, suggesting that write-in gubernatorial candidates were using the lawsuit as a vehicle to promote their campaigns. Blanchard emphasized that she supports the whole Republican ticket. “I’m very disappointed in Judge Griffin’s ruling,” stated Rebecca Rogers of Focus on America. “He could have taken an epic stand for election integrity, but he chose to support the status quo instead.” “We presented evidence at the August 30 hearing that Alabama’s voting machines are vulnerable to hacking,” Rogers continued. “We know that at least some machines misread copied ballots as valid because that’s been shown to happen. With all the controversy surrounding elections today, we were asking the Judge to rule in favor of a method of counting that’s been used for centuries to give honest results–hand counting the ballots. Apparently, Judge Griffin accepted the State’s assurances that all was well and that there wasn’t anything to see here with our election machines.” Marshall, who is defending the state, asked that the case be dismissed. In the ruling, Griffin stated, “Plaintiffs fail to establish irreparable harm because their alleged injury is speculative. Further, the named Plaintiffs have failed to offer any testimony—whether by declaration or live at the hearing—to substantiate any allegations regarding their own circumstances. And without such evidence, Plaintiff has not met their burden to show that they themselves would suffer immediate and irreparable injury.” The Secretary of State’s office maintains that Alabama has the most secure voting system in the country. To connect with the author of this story, or to comment, email brandonmreporter@gmail.com.
Confederate group opposing suit over Tuskegee monument site
A Confederate heritage group will fight an Alabama county’s lawsuit that could lead to the removal of a rebel monument in the heart of nearly all-Black Tuskegee, the group’s lawyer said Tuesday. While Macon County has asked a court to give it the deed to a downtown square where the memorial has stood for 115 years — potentially a key first step toward taking down the statue — the United Daughters of the Confederacy owns the square legally and wants the monument to remain, said Jay Hinton, an attorney for the group, in its first public response to the court fight. “All of those members have ancestors who are honored by that monument,” he said. The monument, located in front of the county courthouse in a city of 9,400 that is 97% Black, has been the subject of on-and-off protests and attempts to remove it for decades. The monument went up at a time when groups all over the South were erecting Civil War memorials to honor rebel troops and portray the cause of the slave-holding Confederacy as noble. Hundreds have been taken down in recent years as they came to be seen as symbols of racial oppression against Black people. Controlled by whites at the time despite having a majority black population, Macon County in 1906 gave a plot at the center of Tuskegee to the Confederate group for use as the site of a rebel monument and as a “park for white people,” records show. The county now contends the land transfer was unconstitutional, partly because of the racial clause. The United Daughters of the Confederacy, which has about a dozen members in Tuskegee, never attempted to exclude anyone from the park because of race and considers the racial restriction offensive, Hinton said, but the wording doesn’t mean that the county should get the land back. “We believe we have owned and still own the square,” he said. While the group has worked with the county and city to come to an agreement, “the only proposal that continued to be offered was simply for the chapter to pay to take down its monument, move it and give the county back the land,” he said. The group refused. A Tuskegee City Council member used a saw to damage the statue earlier this year in hopes it would topple over, but it didn’t, and the county subsequently filed suit in September. The United Daughters of the Confederacy has since spent several thousand dollars on repairs, Hinton said. Located about 40 miles (64 kilometers) east of the state capital of Montgomery, Tuskegee is the home of Tuskegee University. The town airfield was where the nation’s first Black military pilots, the Tuskegee Airmen, trained during World War II. Republished with the permission of the Associated Press.
