Five Waynesboro residents who are registered voters in the city have filed a lawsuit requesting a judge force the local electoral board to certify the results of the Nov. 5 election after those officials announced their intention not to do so.
The suit, filed against the board’s Chairman Curtis Lilly II and Vice Chairman Scott Mares, comes three weeks after the pair filed a lawsuit of their own. In their original suit, Lilly and Mares assert that the vote-counting machines used in Virginia are unconstitutional.
The allegations made in the lawsuit parrot many of the conspiracy theories floated in conservative circles during the past two national elections, namely that voting machines connected to the internet can be hacked or manipulated by outside agents. Voting machines in Virginia are not connected to the internet, and Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin has regularly defended the state’s election integrity, including the use of voting machines.
While electoral board members do not run for the office, the majority on each board is appointed by the governing party of the commonwealth: in this case, the GOP.
The countersuit filed Monday in Waynesboro Circuit Court by the Advancement Project, a Washington-based liberal nonprofit organization more often associated with racial justice cases, and the Washington law firm of Crowell and Moring is on behalf of five Waynesboro residents who have already voted or are planning to vote. Those residents include Jennifer Lewis, Christopher Graham, Ann Criser-Shedd, Gregory Fife and Andrea Jackson.
Lewis, a two-time Democratic candidate for the 6th Congressional District seat, said in a statement “that the chairman and the vice chairman should do their job. Instead, they are purposely misinterpreting what they are charged to do. I cast my vote and have every right to expect that it will be counted on election day.”
Thomas Ranieri, a Front Royal-based attorney who filed the suit on behalf of Lilly and Mares, told the News Virginian last week that the original suit “was filed to get the secrecy out of the Virginia elections.” Ranieri further said the suit is “an attempt to ensure that the will of Virginia is accurately recorded and in the open.”
The plaintiffs in the countersuit have requested a declaratory judgment, injunctive relief and a writ of mandamus. Their suit says the electoral board’s “certification duties are ministerial, and they have no discretion over the certification process.” Certifying election results has been recognized for centuries, the suit says.
As for the declaratory judgment, the plaintiffs ask the court to issue an order saying that the refusal to certify “would violate the plaintiffs’ right to vote under the Virginia Constitution.”
As for injunctive relief, the plaintiffs say they are likely to succeed on the merits of their complaint, arguing a refusal to certify the results of the election “would effectively strip plaintiffs of their right to suffrage under the Virginia Constitution.” The injunctive relief is in the public’s interest, they say.
The plaintiffs also say the request for injunctive relief “would not only protect their own rights under the Virginia Bill of Rights, but also those of every voter in Waynesboro. Injunctive relief prohibits defendants from disenfranchising any voter in Waynesboro.”
A writ of mandamus prior to the Nov. 5 election “will provide substantial clarity for defendants, allowing them to perform their ministerial duties in tabulating and certifying election results without substantial delay and as required by the Virginia Constitution and Code of Virginia.”
With only two weeks left until Election Day, time is running out for hearings on either lawsuit. The limited time frame is made even more limited when the number of civil docket days in Waynesboro Circuit Court is taken into account.
Source: www.dailyprogress.com
Be First to Comment