DeJoy ordered changes to postal operations that have resulted in delayed mail delivery and a reduced equipment supply. Last month, some states sued [1] amidst concerns over the election in November (with greater than usual reliance on mail-in ballots because of the coronavirus pandemic) and suspicion of cronyism.
One of them was Colorado. The state also just secured
a temporary restraining order (TRO) that bars the USPS from continuing to distribute an
information postcard in Colorado. The mailer originated from the USPS and consists of boilerplate verbiage on how to vote. Colorado
contends the information contains false statements.
Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold, a
plaintiff, made five claims in her complaint against DeJoy, the USPS, and other
named defendants to stop the mailings [2]
Complaint [3]
The judge granted the TRO [4] and the next hearing is scheduled for this Friday,
September 18, 2020.
I’ve distilled Griswold’s five claims below.
Do you think the judge will agree with her complaint? Do you think there
is evidence of election fraud and efforts to manipulate the vote at the USPS as
Griswold contends? Has the Postal Service been politicized?
Claim I – Violation of the Elections Clause Article I, § 4
“The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.”
COMPLAINT: “19. … Defendants interfere with the “Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections” which the Constitution allocates to Colorado, not the Postal Service”
Claim II - Violation of the Tenth Amendment
“… [t]he powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
COMPLAINT: “… the Framers intended the States to “keep for themselves. . . the power to regulate elections.””
Claim III – Violation of the Constitutional Right to Vote
“all qualified voters have a constitutionally protected right to vote . . . and to have their votes counted.” Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U.S. 533, 554 (1964)
COMPLAINT cites several Articles and Amendments to support the argument of unfair burden on the voter because of deadlines, time frames, requests, methods of casting votes etc
“34. Defendants’ actions are not supported by any interest that justifies this serious burden on the right to vote.”
Claim IV - Violation of 52 U.S.C. § 10101(b) (b) Intimidation, threats, or coercion
COMPLAINT: “39. Defendants’ false statements about Colorado law violate section 10101(b) by intimidating, coercing, attempting to intimidate, and/or attempting to coerce Colorado voters not to vote in the upcoming election.”
Claim V - Violation of the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act 52 U.S.C. § 20302(a)(1)
This guarantees armed forces service people living outside their voting precinct the right to cast an absentee ballot In Colorado, the Secretary of State is the position that oversee this.
COMPLAINT: "45. Secretary Griswold “is the state official responsible for implementing this article and the state's responsibilities under the … Act”
COMPLAINT: "49. Coloradans who are absent uniformed services voters and overseas voters and who would otherwise vote under the guidance of Colorado election officials will be confused by the false statements by the Postal Service and will not vote in the upcoming elections"
[3] https://wp-cpr.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/2020/09/USPS-Complaint_Filed.pdf
[4] https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/13/politics/colorado-temporary-restraining-order-voter-mailers/index.html
Test
ReplyDeleteI do not believe Colorado’s voters were going to be mislead on the voting procedures via the MAIL. The accusation is that there are false statements on the mailers sent by the USPS. The first argument is regarding the statement that says “request your mail-in ballot at least 15 days before the election.” If a person were to do so, this would not prohibit a person from voting. The USPS is simply stating that a registered voter may request a ballot via the mail 15 days prior. The second argument is that voters who didn’t receive a ballot, due to a move, not updating their address, the Postal Service lost it, or they received the ballot and it was misplaced, can vote in person and request a replacement ballot closer than 15 days to election day. This merely provides more options for registered voters. The fifth bullet point, “We recommend you mail your ballot at least 7 days before Election Day” is merely a recommendation.
ReplyDeleteI don’t believe that citizens have lost their right to vote by the USPS proving information and recommendations. I believe it was the Judge’s duty to investigate the claim to ensure citizens have good information. The USPS could have made the mailer more clear and stated all options for registered voters. I feel that the USPS has been politicized.
I agree on all of your points Jennifer. They don't seem to be misleading anyone merely stating options and suggestions. What they say on the mailer isn't "false" although maybe not the whole story.
DeleteI believe the mailer that was sent out by the USPS had misleading information that could confuse people. USPS was alerted of this and did not do anything to stop the mailer from going out to the people of Colorado. The information provided on the mailer does not provide information that is relevant to the people of Colorado and they should have either delayed the mailer and done something to stop it from going out. My concern is that those who may have not requested a mail in ballot and received it may confuse this for junk or spam mail. As well the mailer states that you should drop off your ballot 7 days prior to election and Colorado wants voters to send them in 8 days prior. There is sufficient misleading information that I think the judge would agree with her complaint.
ReplyDeleteI think the mailer has good intentions to begin with. It was meant to inform the voters of how and when to vote. I don’t think this is evidence of election fraud. I do believe that the postal service should have done something when it was brought to their attention that the mailer could potentially confuse or mislead people. An argument can be made that the mailer does have a disclaimer that every state is different and a QR code to help find the way to vote in your state.
Yes, the postal service has been politicized especially during this election. There have been many arguments of the legitimacy of voting by mail and how this election is going to look. I think both parties have taken advantage of this and used it to support whatever argument they are trying to make.
Stef, you bring up a great point about how the intention was good- they were not sending this out specifically to mislead customers or to support voter fraud. Does a poorly worded mailer constitute manipulation? Like so many cases, it seems as though the plaintiff is attempting to make a connection where there isn't one, possibly in an attempt to politicize, as you mention. Emil makes the point below that many of the "injuries" haven't occurred yet and although as we have learned, you can file based on imminent injury, I don't think they have made the case that anything is imminent. As you say, both sides have some fault, but is it enough for the plaintiff's case? My wager is no.
DeleteI think the majority of people will do the right thing. The political manipulations I think are not related to the instructions that were given to help people feel more comfortable with the reality. I think there is a legitimate concern that should be addressed and a court action is appropriate to address the solution even if it only draws attention to the situation.
DeleteI am not totally sure how to feel about this whole ordeal with the US Postal Service. While I understand that there have been problems, I am not sure if it means that there is evidence of election fraud and efforts to manipulate the vote. The mailer sent out by USPS seems to have been in good standing just because it was merely informative. While it may not have been completely applicable to Colorado's election procedures, it seems to only try to inform voters of suggested time frames when it comes to voting.
ReplyDeleteAll of this aside, USPS has been greatly politicized recently. I do not have a fully-formed opinion on this issue because I do not work in the USPS and do not know exactly what has been happening within that agency, but media coverage about USPS has been highly inflammatory.
The first recommendation on the postcard is to basically plan ahead. Good advice. The second addresses that states have different dates and rules, and it gives a link to look up more information (and a QR code in another spot). The QR code and link on the postcard, to find out more information, is the only thing that I think may not be accessible to all U.S. citizens, or in this case, Colorado citizens. I would guess not all citizens have the electronic means of getting more information. The postcard does at least warn them that there is more information to be found. The last three recommendations may cause confusion.
ReplyDeleteThe first claim addresses the Election Clause. The mailing does at the very least make the Colorado election process confusing when compared to the recommendations of the USPS. Times and places could be misrepresented by the conflicting statements on how and when voting is actually conducted in Colorado. I think that should be enough to stop the mailing in Colorado. However, I do not think that the USPS did something unconstitutional, and so I do not think there is validity to the claim. The postcard was not a legal document, and I do not think a reasonable person would interpret it as such.
As for the rest of the claims, I do not believe that they are valid in any regard. I will quickly address each of them. Claim 2: I do not see any evidence that the post office is trying to take away or regulate the states’ rights. A postcard with suggestions is not a regulation or rule. Claim 3: I do not see any evidence of the postcard attempting to take away a person’s right to vote. On the surface it looks like it was actually trying to help voters. Claim 4: There were no intimidation, threats, or coercion in the message of the mailing. I found the mailing to be quite the opposite, and actually trying to help people vote by offering recommendations and putting some faith back in the USPS that has been questioned as of late. Claim 5: I do not see any evidence that there is a violation of the Voting Act. The postcard does not address the Act, and the complaint is that family members of persons in uniform overseas could be confused. The process for uniform overseas voting is different from the regular voting system, and the mailing likely would not add or take away more to that complexity. Additional information for uniformed voters who are abroad would need to be supplied regardless of whether the postcard went out or not. Colorado was already planning on address it as part of their responsibility.
Is there evidence of election fraud? I do not see it. I think letting people know that there are rules and dates that are specific to each state alleviates any skepticism. Is the post office being politicized? I do not think it would make national news if it were not.
I’ll touch on a couple aspects of this case and I believe I’ve picked up on intent for each party.
ReplyDeleteAspect: The mailer is what it is. It is only information regarding the USPS. It is meant to tell the voter if you count on the USPS to deliver your vote to your respective state, there is no guarantee it will arrive if you mail it less than 7 days prior to the election. Take into account that the country does not know how to handle the COVID-voting situation. If we look back in time during pandemics there was not a social distance mandate and the populations were not at the levels we have today. The mailer does not show intent to confuse voters, it rather states to check with local voting rules and starts with “if you vote by mail”. Defendant Argument: you cannot argue elements of the mailer but must take the whole mailer and the qualifying statements in context.
Aspect: The mailer does not clearly affirm that this only applies to voters mailing their ballots. I’ve seen broadly distributed government information statements that clearly state the intent and repeat the intent or make the qualifying statement stand out in attention getting text. I can understand how a small population of Colorado could take the mailer in context stated by the plaintiff. I do question how much of the population of Colorado “will be confused”. I do recognize room for improvement on the mailer. Plaintiff Argument: Residents of the state of Colorado could apply the suggestions stated in the mailer as applicable to what they know. What they know is, this is not how it was done last year so there must be changes to the state process. Example is Utah, we don’t get USPS mailers prior to the mailed ballots and why is this time different.
Political Agenda, Colorado: I can see how the democratic lead state of Colorado wants to limit statements of information with the republican lead cabinet and Postmaster General. The more they can limit information spread by the republican lead government entities, the more they can control what residents are exposed to.
Political Agenda, President and cabinet: There is a threat to swing states being swayed by additional illegal ballots being cast by mail. The ballot counting entities have stated they have precautions in place, but there is no consequence to mailing additional “fake” ballots. A person dropping additional fake ballots in the community mailbox 1 day prior to the election cut off has very little chance of being caught. Specially in the case that the person is using dead people’s information. The President is going to influence as much as he can to prevent uncontrolled mailed ballots. Voting in person is the best mitigation.
These allegations are loaded. The distribution of the mailers has already occurred; but the real claims relate to events that have not yet occurred i.e. the coercion and unconstitutional infringement on Colorado residents’ right to vote. I feel that the lawsuit was filed prematurely, because, distribution of the mailers is the cause, but the effect is the legitimate impact the mailers have on Colorado voters-which again, can’t be reasonably determined until after the election.
ReplyDeleteIn response to the question whether a judge will agree with Griswold’s complaint, I think it is unlikely, but it truly depends on the judge. Lawsuits cannot be filed based on harm that has not yet occurred. Although, the mailers contain misleading, inapplicable, and false information, in regard to Colorado voting procedures; the correct information is not being withheld from Colorado residents. In fact, the correct voting information is highly publicized across the state, in comparison to the single USPS mailer containing “manipulative and coercive” information. Jena Griswold has already sent her own mailer to Colorado residents, in response to the USPS mailer. I don’t believe a judge will find that the mailer poses: irreparable harm, serious burden, intimidation, threats, nor coercion. The claims alleged in the mailer are confusing, at best.
In contrast to Griswold’s five causes of action, I would like to address the five bullet points listed on the mailer:
1. “Start today, give yourself and your election officials ample time to complete the process”
2. “Rules and other dates vary by state, so contact your election board to confirm”
3. Request your mail-in ballot (often called “absentee” ballot) at least 15 days before Election Day”- This is the only statement that may uphold Griswold’s causes of action, because absentee and mail-in ballots are two separate ballots. However, several months prior to the election, mail-in ballots are automatically mailed to Colorado residents who elect to vote by mail. These ballots contain instruction on how/when to mail your ballot and various drop-off locations. Would this mailer be irrelevant to Colorado residents voting via an absentee ballot? Given that the absentee voters are likely not in the state to receive the USPS mailer?
4. “Once received, follow the instructions. Add postage to return envelope if needed”
5. “We recommend you mail your ballot at least 7 days before Election Day”
Colorado is a “blue state”, but I feel that this lawsuit was filed to create a buffer/protection, in the event that Colorado “goes red” in the 2020 election. I don’t think the legal basis of said claims can be sustained prior to the election-if at all.
Has the postal service been politicized? Well, we’re living in a world where everything seems to be politicized. The mailers were not distributed by accident, but I don’t believe USPS is the proper organization to blame here.
I agree with your post, and I thought similarly with your responses. I don't think USPS is the one to blame in this case, and I do not believe that there is enough evidence to show that the ballot will create harm; and perhaps, it may cause some confusion but I do not think they meant to intentionally confuse or sway the recipients of the forms. I think they were trying to be informative but perhaps it did not go as well as they had hoped. Nevertheless, I do not believe that we can blame USPS, but I think we could try to figure out why this was not addressed but those who created the information. If the information was incorrect, why did it not get resolved before the information was sent out?
DeleteI think the case may be early if you are looking at the actual impact but if there is the potential for an imminent impact with no ability to seek redress after the impact it should be considered now.
DeleteClaim I – Violation of the Elections Clause Article I, § 4
ReplyDeleteCOMPLAINT: “19. … Defendants interfere with the “Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections” which the Constitution allocates to Colorado, not the Postal Service”
The US postal card gives recommendations “start today”, “rules and dates vary by state”, “request your mail in ballot”, “recommend you mail your ballot”, does not change the rules and dates posted at each individual website (usa.gov/election-office) reached via usps.com/votinginfo which clearly indicates that in Colorado, you can register to vote in person up to 7pm on Election Day.
Claim II - Violation of the Tenth Amendment
COMPLAINT: “… the Framers intended the States to “keep for themselves. . . the power to regulate elections.””
The power to regulate the election for the state of Colorado still rests with the state of Colorado. The USPS has not overtaken the power to regulate the election in the state of Colorado.
Claim III – Violation of the Constitutional Right to Vote
COMPLAINT cites several Articles and Amendments to support the argument of unfair burden on the voter because of deadlines, time frames, requests, methods of casting votes etc.
The USPS is “providing an effective way to deliver a ballot” it is not changing any of the deadlines, time frames, nor methods of casting votes as outlined by each individual state.
Claim IV - Violation of 52 U.S.C. § 10101(b) (b) Intimidation, threats, or coercion
COMPLAINT: “39. Defendants’ false statements about Colorado law violate section 10101(b) by intimidating, coercing, attempting to intimidate, and/or attempting to coerce Colorado voters not to vote in the upcoming election.”
There is no intimidation, threat or coercion printed anywhere on this ballot as indicated above simply recommendations and a reference to rules and dates that vary with the link clearly provided.
Claim V - Violation of the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act 52 U.S.C. § 20302(a)(1)
This guarantees armed forces service people living outside their voting precinct the right to cast an absentee ballot In Colorado, the Secretary of State is the position that oversee this.
There is nothing printed on the postcard that would indicate armed forces service people living outside their voting precinct cannot vote.
Do you think the judge will agree with Griswold’s complaint - no, I don’t, as I do not see evidence based on the information above of election fraud nor efforts to manipulate the vote at the USPS. Yes, the USPS has been politicized because they are the method of delivery for the most important processes we will take part in as citizens of the United States.
First, I think it will interesting to see what they decide on Sept 18th on the case. Nevertheless, I think the complaints are valid, because they states that they knew that the information did not pertain to the state. However, they did not take the initiative to change the information, and they could have changed the information or, at the least, clarify the information. But they did not, and they sent out the information. I do not believe USPS meant to mislead the anyone from the information that was sent out, but I guess you can question their actions of not acting when they knew the information was not accurate on the forms that were sent out. However, I don't think the judge was rule in the plaintiff's favor because I don't believe there is enough evidence that shows that fraud was their intention, or to sway the votes to a certain party. Also, I don't know if I would blame USPS for the information that was sent, shouldn't it be the ones who have created the information and the ones who were responsible in creating the ballots and instructions to be sent out? But maybe we should question those people who had the responsibility to write the information, what were their intentions in the creation of the information? And why didn't they review and edit the information so the information was posted correctly?
ReplyDeleteI want to talk about my experience with the delays in the mailings. A large part of my work is with retirees and their medical care. This includes enrollment and medical reimbursements. While it would be more cost effective and easier to manage everything electronically this does not work for many of the elderly. We track the timing of the post office so we can answer the questions of the retirees on fixed incomes looking for every dollar of their reimbursements. The timing usually increases with the Christmas rush but the rest of the year it is pretty steady except for national disasters like hurricanes having a big impact on our ability to service this older population. The recent changes in the post office have been noticeable to us and we have changes our messages accordingly. Anything that will impact this process I think will make a change in voting behaviors. If you are elderly and afraid to go out and risk get COVID and now you are told there will be problems with mailing ballots and this is reinforced by other mail now being delayed this is a problem. The process of voting clearly belongs to the states but can be impacted by decision like this change in the post office. This could be considered an interference in the states process. Decisions were made in the states based on the existing status. Any changes to the current status that impacts the states should have received input from the states before it was implemented. I believe there is clearly a case for the courts to step in here. Would this be significantly different than shutting down a federal road or bridge to prevent a group of isolated people (a tribe) from getting to their poling place? Or just making it difficult for them to get there on time. I don’t know who would benefit from this impact but setting up a situation where you can claim problems in the process to meet your own outcome in inappropriate.
ReplyDeleteAs part of my work, I send out letters to the public. About 30% of the time the letters are actually read. I’m curious as to how many people would have actually read the mailer? Regardless, good information needs to be relayed to the public.
DeleteWith the older population we have a good percentage that will read the documents. They are retired and usually have time to spare. Many of these communications have checks attached that provides motivation as well.
DeleteJust in:Jena Griswold @JenaGriswold
ReplyDeleteBREAKING: We just reached a settlement with the
@USPS regarding the incorrect USPS election mailers. They will destroy all unsent mailers, and stop sending out misinformation to Colorado voters!
10:21 AM · Sep 18, 2020·Twitter Web App
As part of the agreement, my office will review and provide input on any further voter education efforts - including their planned television, radio, and digital outreach.
We can take @USPS
and Postmaster DeJoy to court again if they send bad election information to Colorado voters. Thank you to @pweiser and the Attorney General’s office for your partnership on this. Thank you also to the media and all of those who've helped correct the record.
Great food blog. Here's the Pumpkin Chocolate Chip Bread
ReplyDeletehttps://www.twopeasandtheirpod.com/pumpkin-chocolate-chip-bread/
Here's the pumpkin brownies that I mentioned as well!
Deletehttps://www.lovefromtheoven.com/wprm_print/34869
Here’s a copy of the agreement... https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cod.200792/gov.uscourts.cod.200792.30.1.pdf
ReplyDelete