Thread by @JRosenblattTV

BREAKDOWN: In 6 legal filings today, both the @claudiatenney and @RepBrindisi campaigns lay out clear, but very different paths forward for #NY22

This is a thread of all of their arguments, and why they matter to the future of this race ⬇️ 1/

First things first, there are three different types of documents submitted: affirmations, orders to show cause and memorandums of law.

While they work hand-in-hand, each serves a slightly different purpose. 2/

The affirmations are the most basic of the three. They essentially assert what the lawyers are arguing should happen, and basic proof for why they feel these things should happen.

The Tenney campaign included vote counts, while the Brindisi campaign a deadline. Examples below 2/

The main Tenney argument, in the affirmation and the other documents, is the counties have reported final, unofficial tallies, and Justice DelConte should allow the counties to certify their results.

The main Brindisi argument: the "sticky" issues need to be resolved first 3/

The next type of document is an order, specifically orders to show cause. These are mandates from the justice for actions to be taken. For example, it was an order that forced the counties to provide the latest counts.

Both campaigns proposed orders to Justice DelConte today 4/

An order to show cause, which both legal teams filed, is the legal equivalent of telling someone to put their money where their mouth is.

Essentially, it lays out a list of actions it wants the court to take. Then, it asks the other parties why those actions shouldn't happen 5/

Tenney's order to show cause basically asks the other parties to argue why all 8 BOEs shouldn't certify their results now; a certification would lead to her ultimately being declared the winner by 12 votes.

This would not include the found Chenango ballots 6/

Brindisi's order to show cause lays out a step-by-step, but somewhat complex way to fix the Oneida/sticky-note problem, but without going to a full recanvass.

His orders do ask for the found Chenango ballots to be counted 7/

The last type of documents submitted are memorandums of law. These are where each legal team lays out precise legal arguments as to why their actions should be taken, citing previous court cases and testimony from this case.

These paint the true portrait of where we now stand 8/

Each one of these is at least ten pages long, so I'll do my best to summarize each one with relevant screenshots.

Lots of little nuggets and insights in these 9/

The main gist of Tenney's MOU is that because there were so many errors made by the various BOEs, specifically the failure to mark each individual ballot, and the lack of a clear way to tell which ballots were objected to, the court has no jurisdiction to rule over them 10/

Brindisi's MOU is much longer. It acknowledges that while these BOEs made errors, every effort should be made to fix them. It asks the justice to order each mistake be fixed one-by-one and lays out a process to do so 11/

iapps.courts.state.ny.us/nyscef/ViewDoc…

The Brindisi campaign asked the Chenango votes to be canvassed; the Tenney campaign did not. These votes appear to favor her and the Republicans.

However, if these votes are canvassed, it could set a precedent that other votes should be canvassed as well, despite BOE errors 12/

Counter-arguments will be filed tomorrow.

The next in-person court appearance is still set for Monday, December 7th 13/13

It's worth noting when the numbers have favored them at one time or another, both campaigns have released statements saying they expect to win this race. With a margin of 12 votes, anything is still possible #NY22