Trump Endorsed Candidate for Secretary of State Mark Finchem and Trump-endorsed Arizona gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake are seeking a preliminary injunction in a lawsuit against Maricopa and Pima Counties and Arizona Secretary of State Katie Hobbs to ban the use of “black box” voting machines in Arizona.
The new motion filed Wednesday in federal court seeks to prevent the use of unsecure electronic voting machines in future elections, including the 2022 election.
The Gateway Pundit recently reported that the federal Cyber Security and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) released a report on Dominion Voting Machines admitting massive vulnerabilities and potential for hacking but continued claims that there was no evidence of fraud in the shady and stolen 2020 election.
Testimony by Professor J. Alex Halderman, who discovered these machine vulnerabilities, is cited numerous times in Lake and Finchem’s new petition.
Electronic voting machines are proven to be compromised and cannot be trusted. “Arizona voters no longer know whether their vote has been accurately tabulated or manipulated,” contends the new pleading.
Mark Finchem released a statement on Wednesday announcing this new filing in federal court.
State Representative @RealMarkFinchem Seeks Preliminary Injunction Against Use of Electronic Voting Machines in Arizona.
— Arizona House Republicans (@AZHouseGOP) June 8, 2022
STATE CAPITOL, PHOENIX – State Representative Mark Finchem announced that attorneys, including Alan Dershowitz, representing him and Kari Lake, today filed a motion for a preliminary injunction in federal court to stop the use of “unsecure black box electronic voting machines” in Arizona.
Representative Finchem issued the following statement regarding the filing:
We have filed a motion seeking to ban the use of black box electronic voting machines in Arizona’s elections while the case is pending.
It’s a reasonable question to ask the defendants whether they know how these electronic machines actually work. They are a BLACK BOX – and the voting machine companies REFUSE to make their systems and software open to the public. WHY WOULD ANYONE TRUST THEM?
The lawsuit alleges, among other things, that the documented and unfixable security failures in electronic voting machines—and the lack transparency in these voting systems—violates citizens’ constitutional rights and 42 U.S. § 1983 including: the Fundamental Right to Vote in Violation of the Fourteenth Amendment; and the Fourteenth Amendment’s Guarantee of Equal Protection.
This is not a partisan issue. Politicians on both sides of the aisle have long criticized the inherent vulnerabilities and insecurity of electronic voting machines, including then-Senator Kamala Harris and Senators Elizabeth Warren and Senator Amy Klobuchar.
The defendants include Katie Hobbs in her official capacity as Secretary of State, and members of the Board of Supervisors for Maricopa and Pima Counties in their official capacities.
Today, we filed a motion for a preliminary injunction to prohibit the use of these unsecure black box voting machines while the case is pending. For this, the law requires us to show that (1) we are likely to succeed on the merits, (2) we will likely suffer irreparable harm if these machines are used, (3) that the balance of equities tips in our favor, and (4) that an injunction is in the
public interest. The motion for a preliminary injunction includes evidence and sworn declarations from five top former military and civilian cyber and cyber-security experts.
For specific relief, the lawsuit proposes a secure alternative to electronic voting machines involving precinct-level hand counting procedures of ballots on secure paper and cameras allowing total transparency to the public including an auditable tabulation.
On Tuesday, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss the complaint.
Defendants claim that it’s too late to fix this—that we are stuck with these BLACK BOX voting machines.
WRONG. We are not stuck with these machines.
Defendants claim that Arizona’s spot checks prevent fraud.
WRONG. Procedures like 2% spot checks do not prevent fraud.
Defendants claim that there is not enough time to institute a hand count strategy.
WRONG. The same people that want to keep these machines are just like the people who oppose voter ID.
Defendants claim the machines are independently tested.
SO WHAT? If that made a difference, why do we keep finding security failures?
Every state needs to ban these corrupted machines.