Sign in or Register
Add Case
    • Explore
      arrow_drop_down
      • Cash Courts vs. Constitutional Courts
      • The Constitution
    • Resources
    • Browse Cases
    • Support
      arrow_drop_down
      • Donate
      • Partner
      • Thank You
    • Contact Us
    Add Case

    Michigan: Donald J. Trump for President v. Jocelyn Benson

    • Date
      November 4, 2020
    • City/County
      Lansing
    • Type of Case
      Voter Fraud, Voter Integrity VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR IMMEDIATE DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
    • Case Details
    • New Page 0
    • prev
    • next
    • Get directions
    • Leave a review
    • Bookmark
    • Share
    • Report
    • prev
    • next
    Title

    Michigan: Donald J. Trump for President v. Jocelyn Benson

    Date
    November 4, 2020
    State or Country
    Michigan
    County/City:
    Lansing
    The Court the Case was filed in

    State of Michigan Court of Claims

    Type of Case
    Voter Fraud, Voter Integrity VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR IMMEDIATE DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
    Case Number

    20-000225-MZ

    Judges

    Judge Cynthia Stephens

    Plaintiff

    DONALD J. TRUMP FOR PRESIDENT,
    INC, and
    ERIC OSTERGREN,

    Defendant

    JOCELYN BENSON, in her official
    Capacity as SECRETARY OF STATE

    Clerk of Court

    Jerome W. Zimmer Jr.

    Judges Comments

    Donald J. Trump for President v. Benson (Michigan State Court)
    The Trump campaign filed suit in Michigan State Court on November 4 against Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, claiming its election observers were not allowed to view the ballot count, as required by Michigan law, and asking the court to stop the counting of votes. On November 6, Judge Cynthia Stephens denied the request, noting in her ruling that the "essence of the count is completed, and the relief is completely unavailable".

    The judge also noted the official complaint did not state "why", "when, where, or by whom" an election observer was allegedly blocked from observing ballot-counting in Michigan

    Comments

    BACKGROUND
    9. A general election is being held in the State of ~ichigan on November 3, 2020.
    10. MCL 168.765a, regarding Absent Voter Counting Boards, where absentee votes
    are processed and counted, states in relevant part as follows:
    At all times, at least 1 election inspector from each major pqlitical party must be present at the
    absent voter counting place and the policies and procedurd adopted by the secretary of state
    regarding the counting of absent voter ballots must be follo,'ed.
    11. Michigan absent voter counting boards are not 9omplying with this statute. These
    boards are being conducted without inspectors from each party being present.

    12. Further, a political party, incorporated organi~ation, or organized committee of
    interested citizens may designate one "challenger" to serve at elch counting board. MCL 168.730.
    13. An election challenger's appointed under MCJ 168.730 has those responsibilities
    described at MCL 168.733.
    '
    14. An election challenger's legal rights are as follo~s:
    . !
    ' '
    a. An election challenger shall be provided a $pace within a polling place where
    they can observe the election procedure and tach person applying to vote. MCL
    168.733(1). I
    b. An election challenger must be allowed opportunity to inspect poll books as
    ballots are issued to electors and witness tl11
    e electors' names being entered in
    the poll book. MCL 168.733(1)(a).
    c. An election Challenger must be allowed to observe the manner in which the
    duties of the election inspectors are being p9rformed. MCL 168.733(l)(b),
    d. An election challenger is authorized to challenge the voting rights of a person
    who the challenger has good reason to belieye is not a registered elector. MCL
    168.733(l)(c).
    e. An election challenger is authorized to chadenge an election procedure that is
    not being properly performed. MCL 168.733(1)(d).
    !
    !
    f. An election challenger may bring to an election inspector's attention any of the
    following: ( 1) improper handling of a ballot ~y an elector or election inspector;
    (2) a violation of a regulation made by the I board of election inspectors with
    regard to the time in which an elector may remain in the polling place; (3)
    campaigning and fundraising being perfonn~d by an election inspector or other
    person covered by MCL 168. 744; and/or ( 4) ~ny other violation of election law
    or other prescribed election procedure. MCrj, 168.733(l)(e). . I .
    g. An election challenger may remain present d~~ring the canvass of votes and until
    the statement ofreturns is duly signed and 1~ade. MCL 168.733(1)(±).
    h. An election challenger may examine each blllot as it is being counted. MCL
    168.733(1)(g). I
    1. An election challenger may keep records of votes cast and other election
    procedures as the challenger desires. MCL 168.733(l)(h)

    J. A.n election challenger may observe the re]cording of absent voter ballots on
    voting machines. MCL 168.733(1)(i).
    15. Michigan values the important role chall ngers perform in assurmg the
    transparency and integrity of elections. For. example, Micl1igan law pro~ides it is a felony
    punishable by up to two years in state prison for any person to threaten or intimidate a challenger
    who is performing any activity described in Michigan law. M : L 168.734( 4); MCL 168.734. It is
    a felony punishable by up to two years in state prison for any terson to prevent the presence of a
    challenger exercising their. rights or to fail to provide a _chal enger with "conveniences for the
    performance ofthe[ir] duties." MCL 168.734.
    16. Local election jurisdictions locate ballot drop-pff boxes without opportunity for
    challengers to observe the process, and as such Secretary Ben~on violates her constitutional and
    I
    statutory authority and damages the integrity of Michigan elect~ons.
    17. Michigan law requires that ballot containers be monatored by vidio survillence See Senate Bill 757 at 76ld(4)(c).
    18. Secretary Benson is violating the Michigan Con _titution and Michigan election law
    by allowing absent voter ballots to be processed and counteJ without allowing challengers to (
    I
    observe the video of the ballot boxes into which these ballots a~:e placed.
    19. Plaintiffs asks Secretary Benson to segregate !ballots cast in these remote and (
    I
    unattended ballot drop boxes and, before the ballots are processed, removed from their verifying
    envelopes, and counted, allow designated challengers to view tAe video of the remote ballot box.
    20. S~cretary Benson's actions and her failure to act 1lave undermined the constitutional
    .
    right of all Michigan voters - including the voters bringing thi~ action -- to participate in fair and
    (
    lawful elections. These Michigan citizens' constitutional rights are being violated by Secretary
    Benson's failure to prevent unlawful ballots to be processed and her failure to ensure that
    statutorily-authorized challengers have a right to do their job.
    COUNT I
    Secretary Benson violated the Equal Prqtection Clause
    of Michigan's Constitutio~
    2 l. Michigan's Constitution declares that " [ n] o f erson shall be de.nied the equal
    protection of the laws .... " Const 1963, mi 1, § 2. 1
    22. This clause is coextensive with the United Stat1
    es Constitution's Equal Protection
    i
    Clause. HarvWe v. State Plumbing & Heating 218 Mich. App. 302, 305-306; 553 N.W.2d 377
    I
    (1996). See also Bush v. Gore, 531 U.S. 98, 104 (2000) ("Haying once granted the right to vote
    on equal terms, the State may not, by later arbitrary and dispdrate treatment, value one person's . '
    vote over that of another."); Harper v. Virginia Bd of Elections; 383 U.S. 663, 665, (1966) ("Once

    the franchise is granted to the electorate, lines may not be drawn which are inconsistent with the
    Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.")'
    23. Plaintiff seeks declaratory and injunctive reliefr~quiring Secretary Benson to direct
    that election authorities comply with Michigan law mandating liection inspectors from each paiiy
    l
    and allowing challengers access to video of ballot boxes befor~ counting of relevant votes takes
    place.

    COUNT II
    Secretary Benson and Oakland County violated Mich~gan voters' rights under the
    Michigan Constitution's "purity of elec~ions" clause.

    24. The Michigan Constitution's "purity of electi~ns" clause states, "the legislature
    shall enact laws to regulate the time, place and manner of all no1~1inations and elections, to preserve
    the purity of elections, to preserve the secrecy of the ballot, to luard against abuses of the elective
    franchise, and to provide for a system of voter registration and absentee voting." Const. 1963, mi
    2, §4(2).
    25. "The phrase 'purity of elections' does not hav, a single precise meaning. But it
    unmistakably requires fairness and evenhandedness in the elec~ion laws of this sta~e." Barrow v.
    Detroit Election Comm., 854 N.W.2d 489,504 (Mich. Ct. Appl 2014).
    26. Michigan statutes protect the purity of elections by allowing ballot chal~engers and
    I
    election inspectors to monitor absentee ballots at counting bom!ds.
    27. Plaintiff seeks declaratory and injunctive relief r~quiring Secretary Benson to direct
    that election authorities comply with Michigan law mandating ~lection inspectors from each party
    and allowing challengers access to video of ballot boxes befoJe counting of relevant votes takes
    place.

    COUNT III
    The Secretary of State is Violating of MfL 168.765a.
    28. MCL 168.765a, regarding Absent Voter Counfng Boards, where absentee votes
    are processed and counted, states in relevant pmi as follows:
    At all times, at least 1 election inspector from each major po,litical party must be present at the
    absent voter counting place and the policies and procedure~ adopted by the secretary of state
    regarding the counting of absent voter ballots must be follo.J.red.

    29. Michigan absent voter counting boards, under !the authority of Secretary Benson.
    are not complying with this statute. These boards are being onducted without inspectors from
    each party being present.

    PRAYER FOR RELIEF
    These Michigan citizens and voters ask this Court to:
    A. Order "a speedy hearing" of this action and "advance it on the calendar" as provided
    by MCR 2.605(D);
    B. Mandate that Secretary Benson order all countiqg and processing of absentee votes
    cease immediately until an election inspector from each par~y is present at each absent voter
    counting board and until video is made available to challenger~ of each ballot box;
    C. Mandate that Secretary Benson order the immeliate segregation of all ballots that
    are not being inspected and monitored as aforesaid and as is re1uired under law. i
    D. Award these Michigan citizens the costs, expetses, and expert witness fees they
    incurred in this action as allowed by law.

    Social Networks
    • Other
    • Facebook
    • Twitter
    • Website
    • Website
    Document Links 1 (Scribd et. al)

    https://courts.michigan.gov/Courts/COC/Documents/20201104%20Sum%20Cmplnt.pdf

    mood_bad
  • No comments yet.
  • Add a comment

    Leave a Reply · Cancel reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

    You May Also Be Interested In

    Michigan, Sidney Powell: TIMOTHY KING et al v. Gov GRETCHEN WHITMER, et al

    • IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
    • 2:20-cv-13134-LVP - RSW
    • COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY, EMERGENCY, AND PERMANENT INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
    • Judge Linda V. Parker Judge R. Steven Whalen

    Michigan: Constantino et al v. City of Detroit et al

    • State of Michigan Third Judicial Circuit Court for the County of Wayne
    • 20-014780-AW
    • Voter Fraud, Voter Integrity Plaintiffs alleged election fraud, seeking to prevent the election results of Detroit and Wayne County from being certified. Judge Timothy M Kenny denied of motion for preliminary relief stating that the plaintiffs' "interpretation of events is incorrect and not credible", with plaintiffs not fully comprehending the "absent ballot tabulation process".
    • Circuit Court Judge Timothy Kenny Chief Judge Third Judicial Circuit Court of Michigan

    Michigan: Michigan Alliance for Retired Americans v. Benson

    • UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION / Michigan Court of Appeals
    • 20-000108-MM (Mich. Ct. Cl.) 1:20-cv-00948 (W.D. Mich.) 354993 (Mich. App.)
    • Voter Fraud, Voter Integrity Whether a policy by the secretary of state of Michigan extending the deadline to receive absentee ballots that are postmarked by Election Day until 14 days after Election Day violates federal law and the U.S Constitution.
    • Honorable Paul L. Maloney Before: CAMERON, P.J., and BOONSTRA, and GADOLA, JJ. CAMERON, P.J
    Donate with Paypal
    Go Fund Me
    Follow Us on FacebookFollow Us on TwitterFollow Us on InstagramFollow Us on Blogger

    Judicial Pedia follows The Constitution of the United States of America which  is the Supreme Law of the United States.    The First Amendment:     Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

    Judicial Pedia gives every American a place to exercise The First Amendment.But, when you post and submit a case you agree to the following:   When this form is submitted.The party giving the written statement declares the facts / information stated are true and confirms this to the best of their knowledge. The party confirms that the information here is both accurate and relevant information has not been omitted.

    Liberty Bell

    The Liberty Bell reads:

    "Proclaim Liberty throughout the land unto all the inhabitants thereof." from Leviticus 25:10.

    Let us continue to "RING" the BELL for Justice.

    • Explore
    • Terms of Use
    • Contact Us

    © Judicial Pedia. All rights reserved.

    person
    Sign in
    personDon't have an account?
    lockForgot password?
    person
    Create an account

    IMPORTANT NOTICE: After registering your account, please check your email and click on the confirmation, then return to the website and log back in with the username and password you received in your email.

    PRIVACY POLICY: Your personal data will be used to support your experience throughout this website, to manage access to your account, and for other purposes described in our privacy policy.

    Already Registered?

    Cart

      • Facebook
      • Twitter
      • WhatsApp
      • Telegram
      • LinkedIn
      • Tumblr
      • VKontakte
      • Mail
      • Copy link