(APN) ATLANTA – Georgia Secretary of State Cathy Cox's Office has challenged Donzella James's lawsuit regarding electronic voting in Georgia, Atlanta Progressive News (APN) has learned.
James filed the lawsuit after her the so-called election "results" showed US Rep. David Scott (D-GA) beat her in the Democratic Primary.
James argued that because Georgia elections are essentially meaningless, so long as they are conducted electronically with no voter verifiable paper trail, therefore, Cox had no basis upon which to declare Scott the winner.
The courts "are just holding" the lawsuit, James told APN.
The state has "made two attempts to say Cathy Cox is not responsible. Then they said the State is not responsible. Then they came back again and said we did not ask for compensation or what we would want from it," James says.
"So we've had to write an answer, our reply, and we did ask for a paper trail. We said we want some way where they can audit those votes and we will know all the votes were recorded," James says.
Cox's Office issued a "Special Appearance Answer of Secretary of State Cox," and "Special Appearance Motion to Dismiss, Secretary of State Cox," on August 16, 2006. Both filings was obtained by APN.
A "Brief in Support of Special Appearance Motion to Dismiss, Secretary of State Cox" was filed by Thurbert Baker, Georgia Attorney General; Dennis Dunn, Deputy Attorney General; and two Senior Assistant Attorney Generals, Stefan Ritter and Penny Hannah. A copy of the brief was also obtained by APN.
The case is currently being heard in the Superior Court of Fulton County, State of Georgia.
In the Motion to Dismiss, Baker argues on behalf of Cox she is not a proper defendant to the law in question, OCGA 21-2-520.
In Baker's Brief, he further details this argument. The law states, Baker argues, "defendants in suits such as the instant matter contesting elections are limited to..." candidates; persons whose eligibility to be candidates is challenged; the Election Superintendent(s) who conducted the contested election; or the "public officer who formally declared the number of votes for and against any question submitted to electors at an election."
Baker goes on to argue Cox is neither a candidate, nor a denied candidate, nor an Elections Superintendent. Nor, Baker argues, was there a ballot question being contested.
The Special Appearance Answer of Cathy Cox argues many defenses, but does not really "answer" the point of James's lawsuit.
"The Secretary of State is without sufficient knowledge or information so as to form a belief so as to admit or deny whether there were irregularities in the election at issue," Baker writes on behalf of Cox.
But Cox does not address the underlying unverifiable character of the E-voting machines, or thus, the elections she has been certifying.
Matthew Cardinale is Editor of Atlanta Progressive News. He has written previously for the Sun-Sentinel Newspaper, Shelterforce Magazine, The Advocate Magazine, The San Francisco Bay View, and the Berkeley Daily Planet Newspaper. He has also written for numerous online publications including OpEdNews, BuzzFlash, CommonDreams, AlterNet, RawStory, and TruthOut.
Must Read (
Well Said (
News (
Touching (
Funny (
Supported (
Interesting (
Inspiring (
Valuable (
