Connect with us

Wisconsin

Wisconsin Supreme Court considers expanding use of absentee ballot drop boxes

Published

on

Wisconsin Supreme Court considers expanding use of absentee ballot drop boxes


MADISON, Wis. (AP) — The Wisconsin Supreme Court is scheduled to hear arguments Monday in a case pushed by Democrats to overturn a ruling that all but eliminated the use of absentee ballot drop boxes in the swing state.

The court’s ruling will come within three months of the Aug. 13 primary and within six months of the November presidential election. A reversal could have implications on what is expected to be another razor-thin presidential race in Wisconsin.

President Joe Biden defeated Donald Trump in Wisconsin by just under 21,000 votes in 2020, four years after Trump narrowly took the state by a similar margin.

Since his defeat, Trump had claimed without evidence that drop boxes led to voter fraud. Democrats, election officials and some Republicans argued the boxes are secure.

Advertisement

At issue is whether to overturn the Wisconsin Supreme Court’s July 2022 ruling that said nothing in state law allowed for absentee drop boxes to be placed anywhere other than in election clerk offices. Conservative justices controlled the court then, but the court flipped to liberal control last year, setting the stage to possibly overturn the ruling.

Changing the ruling now “threatens to politicize this Court and cast a pall over the election” and unleash a new wave of legal challenges, attorneys for the Republican National Committee and Wisconsin Republican Party argued in court filings.

There have been no changes in the facts or the law to warrant overturning the ruling and it’s too close to the election to make changes now anyway, they contend.

What to know about the 2024 Election

Democrats argue the court misinterpreted the law in its 2022 ruling by wrongly concluding that absentee ballots can only be returned to a clerk in their office and not to a drop box they control that is located elsewhere. Clerks should be allowed “to decide for themselves how and where to accept the return of absentee ballots,” attorneys argue in court filings.

Advertisement

Priorities USA, a liberal voter mobilization group, and the Wisconsin Alliance for Retired Voters asked the court to reconsider the 2022 ruling. Democratic Gov. Tony Evers and the Wisconsin Elections Commission, which administers elections, support overturning it.

Attorneys for the groups that brought the challenge say in court filings that drop boxes became controversial only “when those determined to cast doubt on election results that did not favor their preferred candidates and causes made them a political punching bag.”

Election officials from four counties, including the two largest and most heavily Democratic in the state, filed a brief in support of overturning the ruling. They argue absentee ballot drop boxes have been used for decades without incident as a secure way for voters to return their ballots.

More than 1,600 absentee ballots arrived at clerks’ offices after Election Day in 2022, when drop boxes were not in use, and therefore were not counted, Democratic attorneys noted in their arguments. But in 2020, when drop boxes were in use and nearly three times as many people voted absentee, only 689 ballots arrived after the election.

Drop boxes were used in 39 other states during the 2022 election, according to the Stanford-MIT Healthy Elections Project.

Advertisement

The popularity of absentee voting exploded during the pandemic in 2020, with more than 40% of all voters in Wisconsin casting mail ballots, a record high. More than 500 drop boxes were set up in more than 430 communities for the election that year, including more than a dozen each in Madison and Milwaukee, the state’s two most heavily Democratic cities.





Source link

Wisconsin

President of Wisconsin’s largest mosque released from ICE custody

Published

on

President of Wisconsin’s largest mosque released from ICE custody


A federal judge has ordered the release of the president of Wisconsin’s largest mosque, after finding that immigration officials probably detained him in retaliation against his public advocacy for Palestinian rights, suppressing his first amendment rights in the process.

The US district judge James Patrick Hanlon’s order on Thursday marked a sharp rebuke against Trump officials, including the secretary of state, Marco Rubio, who had tried to paint Salah Sarsour as a national security threat.

“Salah Sarsour, who has lived in this country for more than three decades and served as a core pillar in his community without any issues, should never have been detained in the first place,” his legal team wrote in a statement. “While we continue to fight these baseless claims in court, today is about celebrating a family being reunited. It is also a sober reminder that, if the government can target Mr Sarsour, everyone’s free speech rights are at risk.”

Sarsour describes himself as a stateless Palestinian, according to the order. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) says that he is a Jordanian citizen. He has lived in the United States for more than three decades, becoming a legal permanent resident in 1998. Immigration officials approved Sarsour’s citizenship application decades ago, though he did not naturalize.

Advertisement

Sarsour has garnered public attention as a champion for Palestinian rights, and serves as a board member of an advocacy group called American Muslims for Palestine.

But Rubio personally signed off on a memo to the DHS last year describing Sarsour as deportable despite his green card, because “his actions undermine US foreign policy to combat antisemitism around the world”. The memo, cited in Hanlon’s order, accuses Sarsour’s group of being “found to have been involved in activities providing funds to Hamas”.

A group of plainclothes ICE officers from at least 10 unmarked vehicles swarmed Sarsour on 30 March of this year, arresting him and putting him in deportation proceedings. ICE ultimately detained him in Clay county jail in Indiana.

Sarsour lost 30lb while detained, the order says. His lawyers told the court that he was “at constant risk of developing serious complications from diabetes given that the medical staff only checks his blood-sugar levels once a month”. Tightly controlling diabetes typically requires multiple glucose checks daily.

Hanlon’s order says that homeland security officials and Rubio probably trampled on Sarsour’s first amendment right to free speech and appeared to have arrested him in retaliation for his Palestinian rights advocacy.

Advertisement

The order cited a New York Times story and the website for the Heritage Foundation, the conservative thinktank that dreamed up Project 2025,

The Heritage Foundation presented the White House with the idea to present prominent foreign-born Muslims and Palestinian rights leaders as terrorists in order to sue them, deport them or pressure employers to fire them, the order says, citing reporting from the Times and Heritage’s own website. Sarsour was probably among the targets of that campaign, the order says.

The federal government, through its lawyers, contended that Sarsour should be deported based on two convictions from more than three decades ago in Israel – one for throwing a molotov cocktail and the other for attempting to store weapons and ammunition.

Sarsour denies having committed those crimes.

But Hanlon viewed those crimes as a non-issue for justifying his incarceration, noting that the federal government knew about them since the 1990s and approved his legal permanent residency and his citizenship application anyway.

Advertisement

Sarsour’s speech on Palestinian rights “is core political speech and squarely within the scope of the First Amendment”, the order says. “Mr Sarsour has submitted evidence allowing a reasonable inference that his protected speech was ‘at least a motivating factor’ in Respondents’ decision to detain him.”

A spokesperson for homeland security described Sarsour as a “terrorist”, citing the convictions from his youth in Israel.

Government lawyers had argued that Sarsour did not have the same first amendment rights as US citizens. If he were released, they said, he should have to pay a $25,000 bond, wear an ankle monitor, check in routinely with ICE and remain confined to his house.

Instead, Hanlon ordered his release on personal recognizance, meaning that Sarsour does not have to pay a cash bond to compel him to show up in court again. The order, however, requires him to remain in the state of Wisconsin.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Wisconsin

Couple asks Wisconsin Supreme Court to hear Brewers 50-50 raffle prize dispute

Published

on

Couple asks Wisconsin Supreme Court to hear Brewers 50-50 raffle prize dispute


(WLUK) – A couple challenging the decision not to award them a 50-50 raffle prize at a Milwaukee Brewers game asked the Wisconsin Supreme Court to take the case, calling it one of “statewide importance.”

Matthew and Annette Flynn purchased ten raffle tickets at the July 7, 2023, game, and held the winning number which was originally selected for $13,000. According to court records, the raffle rules in effect at the time required the winning ticket holder to claim the prize at a designated 50-50 table by the end of the top of the seventh inning. Flynn said she did not see the winning number displayed or hear it announced and was directed by stadium personnel to another location before making her way to the claim table. Officials determined she did not arrive before the deadline and selected a new winning ticket.

The Flynns sued, but the circuit and appeals courts ruled the raffle’s rules gave the foundation sole discretion to determine the official winner and that the rules clearly stated a participant who failed to claim the prize within the specified time would be disqualified.

In a petition to the Wisconsin Supreme Court filed Wednesday, the Flynn’s asked the high court to take the case, saying the decision “affects not only the parties to this action but potentially every Wisconsin resident who participates in charitable raffles and similar gaming activities.”

Advertisement

“This case presents significant questions concerning contractual discretion, discovery, judicial review of charitable gaming decisions, and the treatment of digital evidence within Wisconsin’s appellate system. For these reasons, Petitioners respectfully request that this Court grant review of the decision of the Court of Appeals,” the petition states.

The high court does not have to take the case. At some point, it will vote on if to take it. If it does, a months-long process to review the issues will begin. If it does not, the appeals court ruling would stand.

According to the rules posted on the Milwaukee Brewers’ website, the deadline to claim the prize is no longer during the game the tickets were purchased.

Comment with Bubbles

BE THE FIRST TO COMMENT

Advertisement

“The Participant in possession of the Raffle ticket with the potential winning number may claim the Prize at the 50/50 Table located on the Loge (2nd) level concourse behind Sections 216/217 until such time as the Ballpark officially closes to fans after the end of the game. If the Participant in possession of the Raffle ticket with the potential winning number does not claim the Prize by the time the Ballpark closes to fans after the end of the game, that Participant may still claim the Prize within thirty (30) days after the conclusion of the Raffle Period for the respective baseball game by contacting the Raffle hotline (414-902-4334). A Prize that is not claimed within thirty (30) days after the conclusion of the Raffle Period will be awarded in compliance with applicable regulations,” the site states.



Source link

Continue Reading

Wisconsin

Wisconsin DOJ probes fatal shooting by Oneida County officer

Published

on

Wisconsin DOJ probes fatal shooting by Oneida County officer


ONEIDA COUNTY, Wis. (WFRV) — The Wisconsin DOJ is investigating an officer-involved death that occurred on the morning of June 17 in the town of Lake Tomahawk.

According to a press release, around 10:30 a.m., two Oneida officers arrived at Lumen Lake Drive to arrest a subject in a felony investigation.

Upon contact with the officers, the subject brandished and shot a firearm. One officer shot the subject in return.

EMS pronounced the subject dead on the scene. No members of law enforcement or the public were injured.

Advertisement

Both officers will be placed on administrative assignment, per the agency’s policy.

WFRV will update this story as needed.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending