Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

workinclasszero

(28,270 posts)
Wed Jun 1, 2016, 06:35 PM Jun 2016

Federal judge calls Sanders backers’ arguments ‘hot air’—denies bid for emergency injunction

Federal judge calls Sanders backers’ arguments ‘hot air’—denies bid for emergency injunction
June 1, 2016
U.S. District Court Judge William Alsup rules from the bench that plaintiffs made ‘absolutely no showing of a violation of federal law’

SAN FRANCISCO (June 1, 2016)—A federal judge in San Francisco delivered a blistering rejection to a bid by supporters of Sen. Bernie Sanders’ presidential campaign for an emergency court order that would have imposed significant eleventh hour requirements on elections officials in California’s June 7 Presidential Primary.

U.S. District Court Judge William Alsup described allegations by plaintiffs’ counsel as “hot air” shortly before ruling verbally from the bench, colorfully noting that “there’s not a single decision in the history of the universe” equating plaintiffs’ alleged facts with a violation of the U.S. Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause. Alsup added that plaintiffs’ made “absolutely no showing of a violation of federal law.”

http://www.sfcityattorney.org/2016/06/01/federal-judge-calls-sanders-backers-arguments-hot-air-denies-bid-emergency-injunction/
14 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

LisaM

(27,803 posts)
1. Good.
Wed Jun 1, 2016, 06:37 PM
Jun 2016

I'm not going to pin that suit on the campaign, but it sure was a bunch of ridiculous all in one place.

JimDandy

(7,318 posts)
3. No it has not. Broad brush blanket statements like that are ridiculous.
Wed Jun 1, 2016, 06:45 PM
Jun 2016

Sanders is a Democrat. He was an Independent until last year and he caucused with Democrats regularly. If you have something specific that burns you up, state it.

 

Trust Buster

(7,299 posts)
4. You will not dictate to me. The whole Sanders campaign has been based on pandering phony
Wed Jun 1, 2016, 06:49 PM
Jun 2016

promises. That's all it's been is hot air.

Bill USA

(6,436 posts)
6. AHA!! THis judge is OBVIOUSLY a tool of the ANTI-CHRIST - Hillary Clinton!! Prepare the stake and
Wed Jun 1, 2016, 06:51 PM
Jun 2016

light thy torches!!!

Gothmog

(145,130 posts)
10. Judge Rules Against San Francisco Bernie Sanders Voters Who Claimed Primary Voting is Too 'Confusing
Wed Jun 1, 2016, 08:23 PM
Jun 2016

This lawsuit was a sad joke http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/San-Francisco-Bernie-Sanders-Voters-Sue-Claim-California-Primary-Voting-is-Too-Confusing-381514681.html

A federal judge rejected on Wednesday a lawsuit by Bernie Sanders supporters who argued elections officials in California were confusing and robbing unaffiliated voters of the chance to vote in the state's June 7 Democratic presidential primary.

U.S. District Court Judge William Alsup in San Francisco said the Voting Rights Defense Project waited too long to request an injunction for radio and TV ads informing "no-party preference," or unaffiliated, voters that they can vote in the presidential primary of the Democratic, American Independent and Libertarian parties.

The group had argued that Alameda and San Francisco county elections officials were failing to inform unaffiliated voters of that right, threatening to disenfranchise thousands of voters. Its lawsuit named California Secretary of State Alex Padilla and two county elections officials.

As the drama unfolded in court, Sanders, who has no official tie to the lawsuit, spoke at a community panel with Asian American leaders in Palo Alto.

Padilla said the lawsuit was frivolous, as did the other two registrar offices. "We don't think there is any merit to the allegations," San Francisco City Attorney spokesman Matt Dorsey said before the ruling. Both counties provided documentation that they have extensively promoted "crossover voting" online, by snail mail postcards and other means. Both registrars also testified they train their workers and cover "cross-over voting in detail."

Number23

(24,544 posts)
13. But you know what's so sad about this? It will only FUEL the "he's being cheated/robbed!1" shrieks
Wed Jun 1, 2016, 09:01 PM
Jun 2016

from his supporters.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Federal judge calls Sande...