News From The Right Side

The 9th Circuit of Appeals Rules That Candidates Have Standing for Lawsuits

The 9th Circuit of Appeals Rules That Candidates Have Standing for Lawsuits

The 9th Circuit of Appeals has ruled that voters do have standing to sue over elections.

Last year the Georgia Supreme Court ruled that gives standing to voters and candidates. If you remember, judges used standing to dismiss election lawsuits from President Trump and others. This means that activist groups should be allowed to inspect the votes in Fulton County. Individual injury is no longer considered a reason to dismiss a case:

Justice Peterson of the GA Supreme Court:

“To that end, only plaintiffs with a cognizable injury can bring a suit in
Georgia courts. Unlike federal law, however, that injury need not
always be individualized; sometimes it can be a generalized
grievance shared by community members, especially other
residents, taxpayers, voters, or citizens.”

It is now November 21, 2022, and we now have a federal ruling that gives standing to “recent and future congressional candidates in the state of California. This bodes well for Abe Hamadeh, who is going to court after the final tally finds him to be behind by 551 votes. The intentional voter suppression in Maricopa County would more than make up that small lead. The bottom line is that Maricopa County must do a new heavily monitored election. A hand recount with poll watchers who are able to see everything.

Globe Newswire writes:

he Ninth Circuit has ruled that Election Integrity Project®California (EIPCa), James Bradley (US Senate Candidate, Co Lead Plaintiff) and recent and future congressional candidates have standing to challenge the constitutionality of California’s election laws, regulations, policies and procedures that have weakened or removed integrity from the election process. Though the Constitution gives authority to state legislators to pass laws to manage elections and process ballots, EIPCa asserts they do not have carte blanche authority to pass laws that diminish the value of lawfully cast ballots.

The decision remanded the lawsuit to the lower court for discovery, which is the next phase of the litigation.”

“This lawsuit is monumental because it is the first to challenge the constitutionality of California’s election laws and procedures, and we are the first to get past the standing issue,” says Mariah Gondeiro, the lead attorney who works for Advocates for Faith and Freedom. “If we win, California will be required to enforce secure and uniform vote casting and vote counting procedures.”

“For over a decade, Election Integrity Project®California has researched and documented every aspect of California’s election process and identified how these laws transformed the traditional Election Day into a 60-day election season fraught with easy to manipulate procedures,” says Linda Paine, President of EIPCa. “We are now seeing California-style laws in states across the country creating the same problems that have been witnessed and documented by EIPCa-trained observers in California for years.”

From The Gateway Pundit

Not only does this case rejuvenate the EIPCa’s effort to clean up California’s corrupt election law, but it may give standing to other candidates nationwide who challenge election laws.  Lake v Hobbs, for example, is pending appeal in the very same Ninth Circuit.  The case was dismissed in August 2022 for a lack of standing because “they have articulated only conjectural allegations of potential injuries that are in any event barred by the Eleventh Amendment, and seek relief that the Court cannot grant under  the Purcell principle.”

Fast forward to the 2022 General Election ripe with widespread machine failure and/or manipulation and it seems the Lake v Hobbs case may have been rather significant in ensuring the election was safe and fair.  Hopefully the Lake Campaign is given a fair opportunity to make their case, finally, in a court of “law”.

The EIP has also raised grave concern with Nevada’s voter lists as well.


  • Steven Ahle

    My investigation into a DHS program that instructed law enforcement to treat Christians as terrorists won me the 2014 CJN Journalist of the Year award. Here is a video of Glenn Beck reading my article on his program: I am a troll bridge. You can cross me, but you will pay a price.

Share the Post:

Comments 10

  1. Doug Litchfield says:

    This used to be the most overturned court in the land. Could it be Sorass missed tainting this group? Very pleasantly surprised at this ruling.

    • Dewd says:

      No, Donald Trump loaded the 9th with judges that care about the Constitution. 10 of them, to be exact.

  2. David of California says:

    That’s potentially great news! I’m 60 and a California native… Perhaps someone will stop Cal DMV from registering illegals to vote!

  3. sandra waechter says:

    God is helping us!!!

  4. baggo says:

    When my wife and I were in Reno Nevada over the 4th of July, a man with a clipboard walk up to us and wanted our name and signature for voting. We told him that we were not residents of Nevada. He said,” Doesn’t matter. Just print your name and sign in the box. We will take care of the rest”. The hole voting process is a joke.

    • Bruce A Fouraker says:

      The Democrat party would get a name and signature, make up an address and fraudulently register the out state people to vote. Then a Democrat operative at that address would receive a ballot, fill it out and mail it in; thus committing voter fraud.

      These slimy Democrat operatives should be given jail time and permanently lose their right to vote.

  5. Rawhide says:

    The federal bench and appeals courts are appointed by the Senate. Sorass doesn’t have any control over them.

  6. Ted says:

    Could we finally be getting some dim glimmer of hope?…

  7. Dennis J. Duffy says:

    I would like to see more discussion/explanation of this issue. To say that the voters/citizens have no standing to sue about elction processes and shenanigans seems to me wrong.

    • billi says:

      It is wrong. My vote is my voice. My vote is my Constitutional right. There is another right i hesitate to use but much more of this unlimited mail in votes and early voting and ??? and that avenue might have to be explored but lawyers are expensive so????

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *