Thread by @kadhim

Court hearing in the GOP Nevada case kicking off in 5 minutes.

Case is brought by four Nevada Republicans, rather than Trump campaign (despite the press conference they held yesterday)

GOP plaintiffs alleged that one of them was not allowed to vote in person because they had cast a mail ballot, which they deny.

Also claims issues with Clark County's signature verification software and that they weren't allowed to observe the vote count

pacer-documents.s3.amazonaws.com/106/146770/115…

The Nevada Secretary of State, Barbara Cegavske (a Republican), responded in a filing that the claims are "absurd", "speculative", and "lack a factual or legal basis"

pacer-documents.s3.amazonaws.com/106/146770/115…

🙏 Background noise from folks who haven't muted their lines plus that beeping sound every time someone joins or leaves the call 🙏

The GOP plaintiffs' lawyer is arguing that they don't have full access to the ballot count, and that they should be allowed to observe from six feet.

But mostly all I can hear is people talking in the background and beeping

Ha, Judge Andrew Gordon cites Justice Kavanaugh's concurrence in the recent Wisconsin case at Scotus, when it blocked a court ordered extension to mail ballot deadlines

Kavanaugh argued that federal judges shouldn't meddle in state election rules. Judge Gordon tells the Trump campaign lawyer:

"You’re asking me it seems to ignore Justice Kavanaugh’s direction. Isn’t that a good counsel to a judge like me to not step in?"

Judge Gordon notes that the plaintiff claiming he could not observe, a Republican strategist and Fox News contributor, says in his affidavit that he was in the media and observer areas in the ballot counting room.

"What specifically did your client not get to see?"

Judge Gordon has moved on from the back-and-forth about how and where exactly the plaintiffs want to be able to observe the count.

He seemed reluctant to issue an order, noting that he could end up being asked to give individual injunctions for anyone who came into his courtroom

Now we're on to the plaintiff who said she wasn't allowed to vote because there was already a mail ballot in her name, which she denies sending.

Gordon is questioning why the lawsuit came 6/7 days after that incident. (She had tried to early vote on October 28.)

Election officials had offered to let the plaintiff (Jill Stokke) vote if she had signed a statement saying that she hadn't signed the mail ballot, but she had refused

It doesn't sound like this lawsuit is going to succeed in halting the use of Clark County's signature matching machines.

Where's the evidence that the signature matching software caused the problem with Stokke's ballot, Gordon asks?

The Trump campaign lawyer doesn't have it

"Why do I grant extraordinary relief if you don’t have evidence to show the likelihood of success on the merits?" Gordon asks

Gordon notes that a Nevada state judge has already looked at Clark County's signature machines, and found that you couldn't complete the count in time without them.

"What you're asking me to do .... Judge Wilson has already found can’t be done under the statutory timeframe."

Judge Gordon keeps asking the GOP lawyer how long he thinks it's going to take if Clark County has to recheck all the ballot signatures by hand.

He doesn't know but offers: "You can’t say to the American people that we’re not going to go back because of the timeframe."

Craig Newby, the Nevada deputy solicitor general, has made a few broad arguments:

On observation -- he said the court shouldn't be getting into the business of writing precise rules that aren't in Nevada law

And on the signature matching machines, he says Clark County has a different process to rural Nevada counties because it has lots more people (Las Vegas), and that there's no evidence in the case that the machines didn't work properly

Mary-Anne Miller, attorney for Clark County, says Chris Prudhome (the plaintiff who says he wasn't allowed to observe the count) was trying to film in contravention of the rules

"He is more than welcome back as an observer at any time if he doesn’t disrupt the system."

This sums it up pretty well

https://twitter.com/alanfeuer/status/1324854563648770058

There are still 63,000 ballots still to be counted in Clark County, Judge Gordon enquiries

"That still have to be processed before they have to be counted," Miller, the county attorney replies.

"Oh, ok"

After arguments from the DNC lawyer, we're back to O'Mara, lawyer for the GOP plaintiffs.

(@KlasfeldReports and @alanfeuer are doing a better job of blow by blow... it's been a long week)

Gordon asks O'Mara, why wasn't it ok for Clark County to let your client vote in person and invalidate the mail ballot? Why doesn't that solve any injury she suffered?

O'Mara says the harm that remains is: “There is a ballot out there that has been fraudulently been filed.”

Judge Gordon to O'Mara, the GOP plaintiffs' lawyer: "I’m not sure factually whether what you’re saying is correct or not."

Maybe I should have known better, but I didn't predict that the flood of post-election litigation would deal with a single, individual ballot that is "out there"

https://twitter.com/kadhim/status/1324860963011563523

Ok, we're getting to the judge's oral decision now

The GOP effort to halt the use of signature matching machines in Clark County has failed.

"I don't find that the plaintiffs have demonstrated a likelihood of success," says Judge Gordon

Trump campaign wasn't a party in this case, but it did tout the lawsuit. Another defeat

"Plaintiffs have shown there is at best one ballot that was improperly placed," Gordon notes -- by contrast, if he halted the use of signature matching machines, tens of thousands of votes may not be counted in time

Judge Gordon hammers the point home:

"I’m not deciding this case on a technicality. Rather I’m deciding that the plaintiffs have not come to the court at this point with a sufficient legal showing and a sufficient evidentiary basis."

Hearing is over