BREAKING: WI Judge Delivers Massive Ruling on Mail-In Ballots Days Before Midterms

BREAKING: Judge Delivers Massive Ruling on Mail-In Ballots Days Before Midterms

Liberals are very sad about a Wisconsin judge who rejected an attempt backed by radicals to demand that absentee ballots without a proper and validated witness address be counted in election tallies as midterm elections are to happen in days, claiming that would disrupt the status quo and cause confusion with voting underway less than two weeks before Election Day.

“The ruling was a win for the Republican-controlled Wisconsin Legislature, which intervened in the lawsuit. The case focused on how much of the address of a witness needs to be included on an absentee ballot certificate in order for the ballot to be counted,” the AP reported, adding:

The Wisconsin Elections Commission has said that an address must include three elements: a street number, street name, and municipality. The League of Women Voters of Wisconsin sued, seeking a ruling that an address can only be missing when the entire field is left blank.

Dane County Circuit Judge Nia Trammell on Wednesday rejected the league’s request for a temporary injunction that would have allowed ballots with incomplete addresses to be counted. Trammell said she feared that loosening the witness address requirement would “would upend the status quo and not preserve it” and also “frustrate the electoral process by causing confusion.”

If she agreed with the league, the ruling would be quickly appealed and possibly overturned, which would result in ballots being tossed that were submitted by voters who thought their witness signatures were sufficient, Trammell said.

“This court does not want to add to the confusion that may arise from a temporary injunction that would all but certainly be appealed on an expedited basis,” she said.

The WI court of Appeals also upheld a lower court ruling on "ballot spoiling", so WI can NOT intentionally "spoil" ballots and people can NOT vote in person if they already mailed in their ballots. The same BS is occurring in PA, where the US Supreme Court tossed a ruling by the US 3 district appeals circuit. That move now reverts PA election law back to its original standing - Mail in Ballots must be completely filled out along with the Envelopes or their vote will not count.

At least the courts in WI understand what their job is, and it NOT politics.

As I said in another thread - The days of Judges legislating from the bench are coming to an end. The people are sick and tired of judges ignoring the will of the people and circumventing the Legislatures.

Nevermind, I think I read your post wrong.

a reply to: Xcathdra

It’s about time. I was beginning to lose all faith in these judges. It’s nice to know there are still some of them not willing to be bought off.

a reply to: Ilikesecrets

No worries, it happens.

a reply to: StarsInDust

100% completely agree with you.

a reply to: Xcathdra

This is great news. Laws are mandatory, not suggestions.

But I don't understand this part:

The WI court of Appeals also upheld a lower court ruling on "ballot spoiling", so WI can NOT intentionally "spoil" ballots and people can NOT vote in person if they already mailed in their ballots.

How/why was WI intentionally spoiling ballots? Were those "spoiled" ballots then sent for curing/adjudication?

Sounds like our Sharpiegate debacle, which "spoiled" ballots and those ballots were sent for "adjudication," but the original "spoiled" ballots were not kept with the new ballot as required by law, thus no oversight.

I’m glad the status quo is being rethought.

a reply to: Xcathdra

a reply to: Boadicea

WI law, if a person sends in a mail in ballot, and something is wrong with the ballot, the person could then go to their election location and cast another vote in person. Theoretically the in person vote would invalidate the mail in ballot. WI law set criteria for what a "spoiled" ballot is and if a person can cast a 2nd vote to invalidate their first vote.

The problem is the law was not being followed correctly, and elections people were claiming spoiled ballots were found so the voter could recast their votes. The potential for election fraud was / is massive since an eligible voter would essentially get 2 votes, both being accepted. What occurred in the 2020 elections was proof of that, especially with the slim margins involved that gave the state to Biden and Evers.

The "spoiled ballot" should not be counted and removed however that never occurred. Thats why some counties had more than 100%+ of votes cast compared to the number of eligible voters in the county.

Wisconsin ballot spoiling is a no-go after court upholds ban

The 2nd District Court of Appeals decided Thursday against hearing an appeal of a Waukesha County circuit court judge’s ruling this month in favor of a conservative group founded by prominent Republicans.

That ruling required the bipartisan Wisconsin Elections Commission to rescind its guidance that allowed the spoiling of ballots that had already been cast. Voters who obtained an absentee ballot, but have not yet voted and want to obtain a new one, can still do that.

Several people who were running had votes cast for them via mail. Those 4 people have sine withdrawn, leaving their names on the ballots. Any person who voted by mail, who voted for a person who dropped out, were being allowed to "spoil" there ballot and were allowed to cast a new vote.

WI law is clear on how that process works, and it does not cover a valid vote for a person who has withdrawn.


This is what occurred in 2020 elections -

In the 2020 presidential election, nearly 33,000 voters spoiled their ballots and cast new ones, nearly 1% of all votes. In that election, President Joe Biden defeated former President Donald Trump by 20,682 votes.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Got it -- thank you for the explanation.

a reply to: StarsInDust

Judges come and go , but the LAW Always Remains........

a reply to: Xcathdra

More good news.

There's been an influx of at least semi-good news lately.

It's nice when the Law is followed.

a reply to: Xcathdra

A little off topic but I heard the Google search "how do I change my vote" spiked in Pennsylvania after the Fedderman / Oz debate the other day.

A little more on topic, a lot of people I know in Wisconsin have, or are planning to, absentee vote as it opened up for us last Tuesday the 25th. If anyone is against these changes there is only one reason, they are losing the ability to cheat easily. It will still happen of course but it's getting harder and harder.

a reply to: Xcathdra

The Republican-led Wisconsin state legislature tries to make good rules to ensure election integrity, but there's this one RINO who consistently sides with Democrats, which leads ultimately to Wisconsin Courts rendering the final decision.

Drop-Boxes being made illegal in Wisconsin had to take that same around about path. The RINO weasel said, I vote with Dims to keep them legal. Wi Court says, Nope...they're illegal.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Anything to invalidate as many votes as possible….sounds like a greasy technicality tactic. That being said, if you can’t put your address down fully, you probably are not voting with much thought.

originally posted by: Overseeall
a reply to: Xcathdra

Anything to invalidate as many votes as possible….sounds like a greasy technicality tactic. That being said, if you can’t put your address down fully, you probably are not voting with much thought.

The votes are invalid because they are not following the legal requirements. If people dont like the requirements they are free to press their legislature to change election laws. Absent that the days of legislating from the bench or the governors desk are coming to an end.

Contrary to some it is not a violation of the voting rights act of 1965.

originally posted by: Overseeall
a reply to: Xcathdra

Anything to invalidate as many votes as possible….sounds like a greasy technicality tactic. That being said, if you can’t put your address down fully, you probably are not voting with much thought.

I thought you were a fan of the law. What happened?