- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
You must log in or register to comment.
Judge rules officials should perform official task, which is their one and only task.
And this is where we are at today. Where’s Captain Obvious when you need him?
What? Is that not… What they do anyways?
Not if they were planning on being obstructionist!
In other news: judge rules firefighters must put out fires
deleted by creator
Yeah, that’s just marketing and branding. Could be worse though. In some countries, you never call the cops unless it’s really really bad. When they show up, they usually just take your money and ignore whatever other crimes happened before that. It’s sort of like a local mafia, but it’s partially government funded.
There are a few of them who were trying to argue that the law doesn’t say they are required to certify results. So they can say “I don’t trust these results, I refuse to certify them”. Or, alternatively, “I think these particular votes were fraudulent, so I’m not going to count them.”
But it might not have been a crime not to. Maybe there’s a precedent now. Ianaloa.
deleted by creator
This is a good decision as it prevents some GOP fuckery, but part of me wonders what the point of the certification step is if it MUST be performed affirmatively without any inquiry. Doesn’t it essentially become a rubber stamp at that point? Couldn’t the step just be eliminated entirely?
From https://protectdemocracy.org/work/election-certification-explained/
Election certification is the process through which the canvass — the process of counting and aggregating ballots, and ensuring that every ballot is accounted for — is concluded. The purpose of certification is not to ensure that votes have been accurately counted, identify irregularities or errors, or to resolve issues with an election — there are other processes built in to address these. Election certification doesn’t occur until the results have already been repeatedly verified during the canvassing process.
