“Donald’s Trumped Up Nevada Lawsuit Is a Fitting End to a Hateful Campaign”

I have written this piece for Slate, analyzing the legal claims about early voting, delving into Nevada’s statutes. It begins:

Donald Trump’s campaign filed a complaint on Tuesday alleging that election officials in Nevada broke the law by allowing up to 300 people to vote who were not in line at closing time on Friday at Cardenas market, a Latino-oriented restaurant in Clark County serving as a temporary early polling place. His campaign also made similar charges about a few other locations. Trump was trying to use this complaint to stop ballots cast there from being counted. This seems likely to be a ploy to try to deprive Hillary Clinton of having Nevada declared for her tonight in the event of a close race with her ahead. Judge Gloria Sturman denied the campaign any preliminary relief to sequester ballots or get information on poll workers, but the suit may continue.

It will take a while to sort out everything, but my initial impression is that—even if it is true that people were allowed to vote late on the Friday night before Election Day at a handful of locations—Trump’s claim is weak on the law. The suit also misunderstands the point of early voting and the lack of harm done when early voting times are extended.

It concludes:

In the end, this lawsuit is likely an Election Day distraction. Chances are, Nevada won’t be close enough for these votes to matter. If it is, Trump has set the stage for an election fight he would likely lose.

If nothing else, this lawsuit will give Trump fodder to claim he wasn’t a real loser because the election was “rigged.” Rigged by many Hispanic voters, incensed with Trump’s hateful rhetoric, coming in droves to a supermarket to exercise their constitutional right to vote like other citizens. Something that should be celebrated is being attacked by Trump, which seems a fitting ending to this campaign.

Share this: