Al Brandano submitted a Writ of Mandamus against the State of New Hampshire and the Secretary of State for failing to follow federal law regarding the retention of election results. He’s doing an electoral Bill Belichick impression. Do your job. But he suspects they won’t, so he has asked the court to compel them.
The evidence is compelling, and following the law should not be an added burden for the office charged with following election laws. As Al documents, in 2020 and 2022, data was destroyed well before 22 months after the election, so it makes sense that NH would do that again. Specifically, the data cards from the electronic voting machines were returned to LHS associated to be wiped.
Related: NH AG Ignores More Than 100 Election Law Violations
In the spirit of expectation, Al is back with a preliminary injunction.
“I respectfully request to move this Court for a preliminary injunction to preserve evidence of the Nov. 5, 2024 election as set out below and for the reasons:” …
The New Hampshire Secretary of State has consistently failed to follow the federal 22-month record retention jaw 42 USC 520701 and allowed the destruction of digital election records in violation of 42 USC 520702. In previous state and federal election cycles, the Secretary of State failed to instruct New Hampshire towns and cities to maintain possession of the Accuvote Memory Cards containing critical election records for the required 22-month retention window after federal elections, as is his duty, per NH RSA 656:42 Ill (c).
Trust in the Nov. 5, 2024 presidential election is critical. Practices of policy and procedures that ensure integrity of outcomes ( Help America Vote Act – Federal Infrastructure Security Act) are all based on transparency, security and must be auditable. Failure to follow exactly usurps voter confidence and the US Constitutional rights to a free and fair election and equal protection guaranteed in the 14th Amendment. It also violates the rule of law and causes irreparable injury to not only, New Hampshire citizens, but could also impact the balance of power in the USA if the ejection falls into question.
Al cites three reasons with supporting paragraphs to make his case. Whether he’ll get an answer in the next two weeks remains unclear. As noted previously, the robes don’t always do their job.
Here is Al’s request for a preliminary injunction.
motion-preliminary-injunction-case-124-cv-00333-sm_aj