2024 US Presidential election is under scrutiny as lawsuit claims discrepancies in Rockland County, New York
A lawsuit challenging the 2024 US Presidential election accuracy, filed by SMART Legislation, highlights alleged voting discrepancies in Rockland County, New York. The lawsuit seeks a hand recount of ballots in presidential and Senate races, with a hearing scheduled for September 22. Statistical anomalies and sworn affidavits questioning the results have fueled the legal challenge.
A formal complaint alleged that more voters submitted sworn affidavits claiming they voted for independent U.S. Senate candidate Diane Sare than were recorded and certified by the Rockland County Board of Elections, raising questions about the official results.
Tired of too many ads?
Remove Ads
What does the lawsuit state?
Tired of too many ads?
Remove Ads
Tired of too many ads?
Remove Ads
A legal case challenging the accuracy of the 2024 US Presidential election is gaining traction. The lawsuit was filed by SMART Legislation , the advocacy arm of SMART Elections, a nonpartisan watchdog organization and it focuses on alleged voting discrepancies in Rockland County, New York, reports NewsWeek. The lawsuit is seeking a full, hand recount of ballots cast in the presidential and U.S. Senate races in Rockland County. A hearing has been scheduled for September 22.When the results of the US elections were declared in November last year, a shift towards the Republican was seen across the country – even in the deeply Democratic stronghold of New York City.In May, New York Supreme Court Judge Rachel Tanguay ruled in open court that the allegations were serious enough to warrant the discovery process. The lawsuit could raise questions and debate about the 2024 US Presidential election but it won't change the result as Congress has certified the results declaring President Donald Trump as the winner.The lawsuit comes at time when unconfirmed reports claimed that voting machines were secretly altered before ballots were cast during elections in November. According to the Dissent in Bloom Substack, Pro V&V—a federally accredited testing laboratory that approved "significant" changes to ES&S voting machines used in over 40% of U.S. counties—"vanished from public view" following the election.Lulu Friesdat, the founder and executive director of SMART Legislation, said in a statement: "There is clear evidence that the Senate results are incorrect, and there are statistical indications that the presidential results are highly unlikely."If the results are incorrect, it is a violation of the constitutional rights of each person who voted in the 2024 Rockland County general election. The best way to determine if the results are correct is to examine the paper ballots in a full public, transparent hand recount of all presidential and Senate ballots in Rockland County. We believe it's vitally important, especially in the current environment, to be absolutely confident about the results of the election."A formal complaint alleged that more voters submitted sworn affidavits claiming they voted for independent U.S. Senate candidate Diane Sare than were recorded and certified by the Rockland County Board of Elections, raising questions about the official results. The complaint also points to several statistical anomalies in the presidential election returns, including districts where hundreds of voters selected Democratic Senate candidate Kirsten Gillibrand, yet not a single vote was recorded for Democratic presidential candidate and former Vice President Kamala Harris.Max Bonamente, a professor of physics and astronomy at the University of Alabama in Huntsville and the author of the Statistics and Analysis of Scientific Data, said in a paper that the 2024 presidential election results were statistically highly unlikely in four of the five towns in Rockland County when compared with 2020 results.Max Bonamente said in a paper on the voting data from Rockland County: "These data would require extreme sociological or political causes for their explanation, and would benefit from further assurances as to their fidelity."Costas Panagopoulos, a professor of political science at Northeastern University, told Newsweek: "Statistical irregularities in elections should always be investigated, but the sources of such inconsistencies, which can include error or miscalculation, are not always nefarious. Still, scrutinizing election results can strengthen confidence in elections. Mistakes can happen."In this case, the drop-off inconsistencies could reflect the idiosyncratic nature of the 2024 presidential election cycle. Alone, statistical comparisons to previous cycles cannot provide definitive proof of wrongdoing."In any case, it does not appear that any of these inconsistencies would be sufficient to change the outcomes of any of the elections in question in New York state. That does not mean they should not be scrutinized, and any errors, if verified, should be corrected for the historical record. But there is not necessarily any need to invalidate any of these elections in these jurisdictions."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
25 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Court hearing set on Trump's use of National Guard and Marines to help with immigration raids in LA
A federal court hearing is scheduled for Thursday (June 12, 2025) on whether the Trump administration can use the National Guard and Marines to assist with immigration raids in Los Angeles. California Gov. Newsom has depicted the federal military intervention in the nation's second-largest city as the onset of a much broader effort by Mr. Trump to overturn political and cultural norms at the heart of the nation's democracy. Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass has echoed that, saying the deployment of troops was unnecessary and meant to undermine local jurisdictions and intimidate the city's large immigrant population. Mr. Newsom filed an emergency motion requesting the court's intervention after President Donald Trump ordered the deployment of roughly 4,000 National Guard members and 700 Marines to Los Angeles following protests over his stepped-up enforcement of immigration laws. The Trump administration called the lawsuit a 'crass political stunt endangering American lives' in its official response on Wednesday. The Democratic governor argued the troops were originally deployed to protect federal buildings and said sending troops to help support immigration raids would only promote civil unrest. The protests over immigration raids in Los Angeles intensified after Mr. Trump called up the National Guard and have since spread to other cities, including Boston, Chicago and Seattle. Federal immigration agents have been arresting people at Home Depot parking lots and other businesses, sparking fear in immigrant communities, after the Trump administration said it wanted to dramatically increase arrests under its immigration crackdown. Mr. Trump has described Los Angeles in dire terms that Bass and Newsom say are nowhere close to the truth. Most demonstrations have been peaceful, but this weekend, some turned raucous with protesters setting cars on fire in downtown Los Angeles. The city has imposed a nightly curfew covering a 1-square-mile (2.5-square-kilometer) section where protests have occurred in the sprawling metropolis of 4 million people. The Marines have not yet been spotted in Los Angeles and Guard troops have had limited engagement with protesters. Newsom filed the motion Tuesday, the same day the military announced some members of the National Guard were now standing in protection around federal agents. The change moves troops closer to engaging in law enforcement actions like deportations, as Mr. Trump has promised as part of his administration's immigration crackdown. The Guard has the authority to temporarily detain people who attack officers but any arrests ultimately would be made by law enforcement. Senior U.S. District Judge Charles R. Breyer chose not to rule immediately but set the hearing for Thursday in federal court in San Francisco. Dozens of mayors from across the Los Angeles region banded together Wednesday to demand the raids stop and the troops leave.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
30 minutes ago
- Business Standard
Colombia prez bypasses lawmakers, issues decree for vote on labour reform
Colombian President Gustavo Petro on Wednesday bypassed legislative opposition and signed a decree summoning voters to the polls in August to decide changes to the country's labour laws, including whether work days should be limited to eight hours. The decree fulfilled Petro's threat to Congress to put his labour system overhaul before voters should senators not approve the 12-question referendum themselves. He issued the measure in a tense political climate following the Saturday shooting of opposition senator and presidential candidate Miguel Uribe Turbay during a public event. The referendum has become the crux of long-running tensions between the executive and legislative branches. After Congress rejected Petro's labour reform twice, most recently in March, he sent lawmakers a 12-question referendum proposal on May 1 as Colombian law requires that the Senate rule on the advisability of referendums. The legislative body two weeks later voted 49-47 against the measure, prompting Petro to accuse lawmakers of fraud. Petro, Colombia's first leftist president, has accused Congress of working against the interest of workers and has asked them to demonstrate across the country. The referendum's questions include whether workers should receive double pay if they work during holidays; whether daytime workdays should end at 6 pm; and whether open-ended contracts should be offered to workers to prioritise job stability. The disagreements between Petro and Congress date back to the start of his term in 2022, but they have heightened as he seeks to consolidate his legacy ahead of next year's legislative and presidential elections. Uribe remained in critical condition on Wednesday following his shooting in broad daylight Saturday during a political rally in the capital, Bogota. Authorities investigating the motive have not ruled out the possibility that it was a targeted attack on the opposition. They are also considering whether it was an attempt to destabilise the current government, or retaliation by illegal armed groups. In anticipation of court challenges, Petro on Wednesday said his government will send the decree to Colombia's Constitutional Court for review. At the same time, the Council of State is considering a lawsuit seeking to annul the Senate's vote.
Time of India
42 minutes ago
- Time of India
Trump to sign resolutions nixing California's EV rules, White House official says
U.S. President Donald Trump will sign three congressional resolutions on Thursday barring California's electric vehicle sales mandates and diesel engine rules, a White House official said, confirming an earlier Reuters report citing auto industry sources and House aides. Trump is signing resolutions of disapproval under the Congressional Review Act to bar California's landmark plan to end the sale of gasoline-only vehicles by 2035, which has been adopted by 11 other states and representing a third of the U.S. auto market. Trump will sign one resolution to repeal a waiver granted by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency under former Democratic President Joe Biden in December, allowing California to mandate that at least 80% of vehicles be electric vehicles by 2035. The White House invited numerous auto industry officials to attend the signing on Thursday, sources said. Trump will also sign a resolution approved by Congress to rescind the EPA's 2023 approval of California's plans to require a rising number of zero-emission heavy-duty trucks, and another resolution on California's low-NOx, or low-nitrogen oxide, regulation for heavy-duty highway and off-road vehicles and engines. "Today's historic bill signing is a major victory for American consumers, manufacturers and U.S. energy security. We thank President Trump and Congress for delivering on their promise to put an end to these extreme mandates and ensure every American can choose the vehicle that's best for them," American Petroleum Institute President and CEO Mike Sommers said. The signing is a win for General Motors, Toyota , auto dealers and other automakers that heavily lobbied against the rules, and a blow to California and environmental groups that say the requirements are essential to ensuring cleaner vehicles and cutting pollution. GM said the move would help align emissions standards with market realities. California announced a plan in 2020 to require that by 2035 at least 80% of new cars sold be electric and up to 20% plug-in hybrid models. California Governor Gavin Newsom has vowed to challenge the repeals in court, saying the action by Congress is illegal and would cost California taxpayers an estimated $45 billion in additional health care costs. Since 1970, California has received more than 100 waivers under the Clean Air Act. The Alliance for Automotive Innovation, representing GM, Toyota, Volkswagen Hyundai Stellantis and others, previously praised the repeal. "The fact is these EV sales mandates were never achievable," the group's CEO, John Bozzella, said. "In reality, meeting the mandates would require diverting finite capital from the EV transition to purchase compliance credits from Tesla." These are the latest actions in recent months taking aim at electric vehicles. A separate bill passed by the U.S. House of Representatives in May would end a $7,500 tax credit for new EVs, impose a new $250 annual fee on EVs for road repair costs and repeal vehicle emissions rules designed to prod automakers into building more EVs. It would also phase out EV battery production tax credits in 2028.
