Judge Strikes Down Clause in NY’s New Election Laws

On Friday, a New York judge invalidated a contentious sentence in the state’s new election regulations.

Bipartisan Practice Broken

Justice Dianne Freestone of the New York Supreme Court claimed the sentence denied courts the ability to make decisions about contested ballots.

The state legislature, which is controlled by Democrats, recently revised Article 9-209(8)e of the 2022 Election Law, adding the following final sentence, “In no circumstance may a court order a ballot that has already been tallied to be uncounted.”

According to Freestone, the section broke the Constitution and broke with long-standing bipartisan practice.

The justice stated the change effectively removed the long-standing custom of keeping a contested ballot on file for three days whilst waiting for judicial oversight.

The New York State Board of Elections has been contacted by The Epoch Times for a response.

The State of Politics was informed by Jennifer Wilson, the state election authority’s spokesperson, that their agency is still examining the decision to determine how it may affect the future election.

The decision was praised by Nick Langworthy, chairman of the New York Republican Party. Though it will probably be contested at a higher court.

The preservation and inspection of ballots are permitted under New York election law in at least a few situations, such as auditing election results and ballot contests. The law is crystal clear that contested ballots must be kept for judicial scrutiny.

Nevertheless, it may be claimed that the challenged clause’s actual interpretation implies that ballots can only be contested prior to canvassing.

If the state appellate court confirms the decision, the timing of the ballot dispute and related judicial review may be once again prolonged to after the ballots have been counted.

This was customary election practice prior to the alterations that were sneaked through with the new law.

Republicans have requested the court reject the state’s new extended absentee voting rules, in addition to challenging the election law in this case.

In August 2020, the state legislature, which is dominated by Democrats, increased absentee voting accessibility to enable any voter who is concerned about the possibility of “contracting or transmitting a disease” to vote absent.

Voters could only utilize absentee votes before the law was changed if they were actually ill. The legislature prolonged the amendment’s expiry date to the end of January 2022, which includes the November 8 midterm elections.

Extending Absentee Voting Provisions is ‘Orwellian’

Because the matter has already been decided by the state appellate courts and is being referred to both the state’s highest court and its appellate courts, Justice Freestone stated she was unable to reverse the rule.

The extended absentee voting, she claimed, went against the wishes of New Yorkers and created the potential for fraud, intimidation, and other forms of wrongdoing.

This article appeared in Conservative Cardinal and has been published here with permission.