Election Law Court Update

[INSIDE JW]

JUDICIAL WATCH FILES SUPREME COURT BRIEF IN HISTORIC ELECTION
INTEGRITY CASE

[[link removed]]

Judicial Watch is in the midst of a massive Supreme Court battle that
goes to the heart of protecting the rule of law in elections.

In our latest effort, we filed our opening brief
[[link removed]]
to the Supreme Court in a case filed on behalf of Congressman Mike
Bost and two presidential electors, who are before the court to
vindicate their standing to challenge an Illinois law extending
Election Day for 14 days beyond the date established by federal law
(_Rep. Michael J. Bost, Laura Pollastrini, and Susan Sweeney v. The
Illinois State Board of Elections and Bernadette Matthews_
[[link removed]
_(No.
1:22-cv-02754, 23-2644, 24-568)).

In June, the Supreme Court agreed to hear
[[link removed]]
our
appeal of the decision
[[link removed]]
of the
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in this case. The lower
courts had denied that Bost and the electors had standing to challenge
Illinois’ practice of counting ballots received up to 14 days after
Election Day. (The Election Day lawsuit was initially filed
[[link removed]]
on May 25, 2022.)

Our Supreme Court brief
[[link removed]]
states:

> Federal law sets the first Tuesday after the first Monday in
> November as the federal Election Day.
>
> ***
>
> Candidates have an obvious interest in the lawfulness and fairness
> of the rules that govern the elections into which they pour their
> time and resources. They also have an obvious interest “in
> ensuring that the final vote tally accurately reflects the legally
> valid votes cast.”
>
> ***
>
> Candidates pour enormous resources into running for election and
> have an obvious interest in the rules that dictate how long their
> races will last and how the ballots will be counted. They also have
> a distinct interest “in ensuring that the final vote tally
> accurately reflects the legally valid votes cast.”

Our legal team makes a simple and powerful argument to the Supreme
Court: It is obvious that candidates have standing to challenge
unlawful rules governing the elections into which they are pouring
untold resources.

In March 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
declined to rehear
[[link removed]]
its previous
ruling in which it agreed with us that it was unlawful for Mississippi
to count ballots that arrived after Election Day (_Libertarian Party
of Mississippi v Wetzel et al_
[[link removed]].
[[link removed]]
(No. 1:24-cv-00037)).

In March 2025 we filed a federal lawsuit
[[link removed]]
against California on behalf of U.S. Rep. Darrell Issa to prevent
state election officials from extending Election Day for seven days
beyond the date established by federal law. California counts ballots
received up to seven days after Election Day (_Darrell Issa v. Shirley
N. Weber, in her official capacity_
[[link removed]]
(No. 3:25-cv-00598)).

Paul Clement, who has argued more than 100 cases before the Supreme
Court, is representing Congressman Bost and the electors with Judicial
Watch before the Supreme Court. Clement is former solicitor general
under President George W. Bush from 2005-2008 and is widely regarded
as among the top Supreme Court litigators in the country.

Robert Popper, a Judicial Watch senior attorney, leads our election
law program. Popper was previously in the Voting Section of the Civil
Rights Division of the Justice Department, where he managed voting
rights investigations, litigations, consent decrees, and settlements
in dozens of states.

T. Russell Nobile, a Judicial Watch senior attorney, is part of our
voting integrity efforts and focuses on campaign and voting issues,
civil rights issues, constitutional law, official misconduct by public
institutions and officials, and other issues.

Other examples of our election law work include:

* In April 2025, we announced
[[link removed]]
that
our analysis of voter registration lists has led to lawsuits and legal
actions under the National Voter Registration Act
[[link removed]]
(NVRA) that have resulted in the removal of five million
[[link removed]]
names from voter rolls in
nearly a dozen states and localities over the last several years.
* In October 2024, we filed a lawsuit
[[link removed]]
on behalf
of itself, the Constitution Party of Oregon, and two lawfully
registered voters of Umatilla County and Marion County, Oregon,
against Lavonne Griffin-Valade in her official capacity as Oregon
Secretary of State and the State of Oregon, to make “a reasonable
effort to remove the names of ineligible voters” from the voter
rolls as required by the NVRA (_Judicial Watch, et al. v. The State of
Oregon et al._
[[link removed]]
(No. 6:24-cv-01783)).
* In May 2024, we sued
[[link removed]]
California to clean up its voter rolls. The lawsuit, filed on behalf
of Judicial Watch and the Libertarian Party of California, similarly
asks the court to compel California to make “a reasonable effort”
to remove ineligible registrants from the rolls as required by federal
law (_Judicial Watch Inc. and the Libertarian Party of CA v. Shirley
Weber et al._
[[link removed]]
(No. 2:24-cv-03750)).

JUSTICE DEPARTMENT SUPPORTS JUDICIAL WATCH IN ILLINOIS VOTER ROLL
CLEAN UP

Judicial Watch continues to take the lead in cleaning up voter rolls
around the country, and now we have some help from the feds.

The U.S. Department of Justice filed a statement of interest
[[link removed]]
in our lawsuit
[[link removed]]
that seeks to force the clean-up of Illinois’ election rolls as
federal law requires (_Judicial Watch, Inc., et al. v. Illinois State
Board of Elections, et al. _
[[link removed].
1:24-cv-01867
[[link removed]])).
U.S. District Court Judge Sara L. Ellis set a hearing in the case for
next week.

The Justice Department filing notes: “This case presents important
questions regarding enforcement of the National Voter Registration
Act.” In a press release
[[link removed]]
announcing the Statement of Interest, Assistant Attorney General
Harmeet K. Dhillon of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division
said:

> It is critical to remove ineligible voters from the registration
> rolls so that elections are conducted fairly, accurately, and
> without fraud. Under the NVRA [National Voter Registration Act],
> states have the responsibility to conduct a robust program of list
> maintenance. The Department of Justice will vigorously enforce those
> requirements to ensure compliance.

The National Voter Registration Act
[[link removed]]
(NVRA) requires states to “conduct a general program that makes a
reasonable effort to remove” from the official voter rolls “the
names of ineligible voters” who have died or changed residence. The
law requires registrations to be cancelled when voters fail to respond
to address confirmation notices and then fail to vote in the next two
general federal elections. In 2018, the Supreme Court confirmed
[[link removed]]
that
such removals are mandatory.

Our lawsuit details that 23 Illinois counties, with a combined
registration list of 980,089 voters, reported removing a combined
total of only 100 registrations in the last two-year reporting period
under a crucial provision of the NVRA. This is an “absurdly small”
number, and there “is no possible way these counties can be
conducting a general program that makes reasonable effort to cancel
registrations of voters who have become ineligible because of a change
of residence while removing so few registrations.”

Our lawsuit demonstrates Illinois voter rolls are a mess and the
Justice Department is right to be concerned about the state’s
failures to keep them clean.

In June 2025, the Justice Department filed a statement of interest
[[link removed]]
in
Judicial Watch’s lawsuit to compel Oregon to clean its voter rolls.

Judicial Watch is a national leader in voting integrity and voting
rights
[[link removed]].

In July 2024, we asked
[[link removed]]
a federal
court to reject the State of Illinois’ motion to dismiss our lawsuit
to compel the state to clean up its voter rolls. The lawsuit was filed
in the United States District Court for the Northern District of
Illinois, on behalf of the nonprofit organizations Illinois Family
Action
[[link removed]]
and Breakthrough Ideas
[[link removed]],
and Carol J. Davis, a lawfully
registered Illinois voter (_Judicial Watch, Inc. et al v. The Illinois
State Board of Elections et al._
[[link removed]]
(No. 1:24-cv-01867)).

In May 2024, we sued
[[link removed]]
California to clean up its voter rolls. The lawsuit, filed on behalf
of the Libertarian Party of California, similarly asks the court to
compel California to make “a reasonable effort” to remove
ineligible registrants from the rolls as required by federal law
(_Judicial Watch Inc. and the Libertarian Party of CA v. Shirley Weber
et al._
[[link removed]]
(No. 2:24-cv-03750)).

JUDICIAL WATCH SUES OVER REMOVAL OF WEST POINT CREST FROM BIBLES IN
CHAPEL

Judicial Watch is keeping a close eye on our military academies, which
came under leftist pressure to retreat from traditional values during
the Biden administration.

Judicial Watch filed a FOIA lawsuit
[[link removed]]
against the U.S. Department of Defense for records about the removal
of the West Point crest from Bibles in the Cadet Chapel at the United
States Military Academy (_Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of
Defense_
[[link removed]]
(No. 1:25-cv-01855)).

The lawsuit was filed after the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, a
component of the Defense Department, failed to respond to a December
13, 2024, FOIA request for:

* All documents that form the basis upon which the decision was made
to remove the West Point Crest from the cover of the Bibles in the
West Point Chapel. Upon information and belief, the West Point Crest
has appeared on the cover of the Bibles in the West Point Chapel since
1984, but circa December 2024, the Crest has been removed from the
Bibles.

* All emails sent to and from Col. Matthew Pawlikowski [former U.S.
Military Academy chaplain
[[link removed]]]
regarding the crest’s appearance on the cover of the Bibles used in
the West Point Chapel.

We filed the FOIA request after receiving information from a reliable
source – the MacArthur Society
[[link removed]],
an
association of West Point graduates – that the West Point crest had
been on the Bibles since 1984 and was removed sometime in December
2024.

In a related incident, in a March 12, 2024, “Message from the 61st
Superintendent
[[link removed]
Superintendent LTG Steven Gilland announced a change to the Army’s
mission statement, referencing the Army’s continued commitment to
“Duty, Honor and Country” without explaining why the words
themselves were deleted.

It appears the Biden administration and its leftist accomplices were
determined to sever all connections between West Point and traditional
values. They added divisive DEI programs to the curriculum and removed
‘Duty, Honor, Country’ from the Military Academy’s mission
statement. Now, we learn they removed the West Point crest from Bibles
in the West Point Chapel. It’s a wonder they didn’t remove the
Bibles.

In May 2025, we uncovered records
[[link removed]]
from West Point
revealing that speakers at the March 2024 “Founders Day
[[link removed]
event were instructed to “AVOID saying ‘removed,’
‘replaced,’ ‘deleted’ [when referring to the new mission
statement] – just refer to the ‘updated mission statement and
reinforce that the motto remains unchanged.” [Emphasis in original]
The records also tied DEI efforts to the mission statement
controversy.

In November 2024, we filed a FOIA lawsuit
[[link removed]]
against
the Defense Department for information regarding the rebranding of
West Point’s Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) office to
“Office of Engagement and Retention.”

In March 2023, records
[[link removed]]
from
the Defense Department showed the U.S. Air Force Academy had made race
and gender instruction a top priority in the training of cadets.

In July 2023, we exposed
[[link removed]]
records from the U.S. Air Force Academy, a component of the Defense
Department, which included instructional materials and emails that
addressed topics such as Critical Race Theory, “white privilege,”
and Black Lives Matter.

In June 2022, we uncovered
[[link removed]]
Critical
Race Theory (CRT) instruction at the U.S. Military Academy. One
training slide contained a graphic titled “MODERN-DAY SLAVERY IN THE
USA.” [Emphasis in original]

COURT STANDS WITH PARENT AGAINST BUCKS COUNTY WITHHOLDING COVID
RECORDS

Here’s a victory for the little guy.

The Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court ruled
[[link removed]]
that Bucks County, Pennsylvania, acted in bad faith in unlawfully
suppressing public records concerning the county health department’s
Covid-19 school guidance. The Commonwealth Court affirmed the trial
court’s
[[link removed]]
May
2023 award of sanctions against Bucks County in the amount of $3,000
to Judicial Watch client, Megan Brock.

Brock is a parent who was sued by Bucks County after the trial
court’s ruling in her favor in an effort to prevent the release of
documents related to Covid restrictions and the re-opening of the
county’s schools that she requested under the Commonwealth’s
Right-to-Know Law (_County of Bucks v. Megan Brock_
[[link removed]]
(Nos.
2022-03083 and 2022-02979)).

In February and March 2022, Brock sent a public records request asking
for all electronic correspondence between Bucks Co. executives and the
Health Department regarding public school Covid-19 guidance
[[link removed]],
which was issued in August 2021. Brock was trying to determine who
authorized the reopening guidance that was changed to include more
restrictive rules about masks, quarantining, and testing.

“This ruling confirms that Bucks County egregiously targeted my
civil rights by wrongfully withholding public records,” said Brock.
“It's frightening as an everyday American to be bullied and attacked
by your own government. I’m extremely thankful to Judicial Watch for
their hard work in protecting my rights and the rights of all
Americans. When Bucks County filed multiple lawsuits against me for
exercising my constitutional rights, Judicial Watch was there when no
one else had my back. I’m grateful for this legal victory and the
precedent it sets for all Pennsylvanians, who have the right to
government transparency. This was not a fair fight, and I could not
have fought this battle alone. Judicial Watch has again ensured that
no one is above the law, not even radical, local politicians!”

This a nice victory for transparency and accountability over arrogant
local officials who abused citizens and schoolchildren over Covid. The
court’s imposing the maximum bad-faith penalties on Bucks County
sends a warning to every bureaucrat and elected official in
Pennsylvania that no one is above the law.



PAKISTANI TRAFFICKER IN BRAZIL HELPED BRING MIDDLE EASTERNERS INTO
U.S.

The common image of hard-working Mexican families working our fields
hides an insidious underbelly of illegal people smuggling, as our
_Corruption Chronicles_ blog reports
[[link removed]].

> In a significant case ignored by the establishment media, an illegal
> immigrant from Honduras has been sentenced to a decade in prison for
> running a massive years-long alien smuggling operation that
> “facilitated the illegal movement of Middle Easterners into the
> United States,”
>
[[link removed]]
> according to the Department of Justice (DOJ). The defendant’s
> “actions put our national security at risk,” the top federal
> prosecutor overseeing the case in the western district of Texas
> confirms. While mainstream media coverage focuses exclusively on
> hard working migrants cruelly deported in nationwide Immigration and
> Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids, the agency is taking serious
> criminals off the streets. That part, however, is not receiving any
> coverage even though the Trump administration is making the
> information readily available on various Department of Homeland
> Security (DHS) websites.
>
> In this important case, Enil Edil Mejia-Zuniga, a 34-year-old
> illegal immigrant from Honduras, was the leader of what federal
> authorities call “a massive alien smuggling conspiracy that
> spanned three years and involved thousands of aliens from over 11
> different countries.” A 33-year-old Mexican illegal immigrant and
> two other Honduran migrants, ages 26 and 32, worked for Mejia-Zuniga
> and have also been criminally charged. A final defendant is in
> custody in Mexico pending an extradition request from the United
> States. The group made millions of dollars off the migrants they
> helped smuggle into the U.S., authorities confirm, adding that the
> case represents the epitome of the ruthless and sophisticated
> criminal organizations that exploit our borders for personal
> financial gain. “For more than three years, these individuals
> operated a transnational smuggling ring driven by greed, moving
> illegal aliens from 11 countries in blatant disregard of the law,”
> said Special Agent in Charge Craig Larrabee of ICE Homeland Security
> Investigations (HSI) in San Antonio, Texas. “Human smuggling
> undermines the security of our borders and disrupts lawful
> immigration processes.”
>
> The DOJ’s announcement includes several pictures of Mejia-Zuniga
> posing with rifles and cash. Court documents reveal that from
> November 2020 through March 2023, the Mejia-Zuniga alien smuggling
> organization (ASO) brought in migrants from Afghanistan, Yemen,
> Egypt, India, Pakistan, and Colombia, through Eagle Pass, Texas.
> Aliens primarily contracted with a Pakistani smuggler based in
> Brazil to be transported to the United States. The Brazilian-based
> associate worked with the San Antonio-based Mejia-Zuniga to
> facilitate travel of the illegal immigrants from South America to
> the United States. Mejia-Zuniga directed operations of the ASO and
> paid drivers, armed “coyotes,” and stash house operators. The
> Honduran man admitted to smuggling between 2,500 to 3,000 aliens
> into the United States in just two years. His business charged
> between $6,500 to $12,000 per alien. Mejia-Zuniga said he made
> $30,000 for every ten illegal aliens who made it to the Rio Grande
> River and another $30,000 if those ten illegal aliens made it to San
> Antonio. Evidence gathered by the feds during their investigation
> includes wire transfers, customer ledgers, foreign identification
> documents and photos of the entire Mejia-Zuniga clan with firearms.
>
> This important yet unreported case was cracked under Operation Take
> Back America
[[link removed]],
> a national plan launched in March to repel the damages of the Biden
> administration’s disastrous open border policies by controlling
> illegal immigration, eliminating drug cartels such as Jalisco New
> Generation, Sinaloa, Michoacan and Los Zetas as well as other
> transnational criminal organizations (TCOs) like Tren de Aragua and
> the famously violent Mara Salvatrucha (MS-13). Thousands of illegal
> immigrants throughout the country have been charged with serious
> crimes under Operation Take Back America and the initiative has led
> to the apprehension of countless others arrested for illegally
> reentering the U.S. who already had felony convictions involving
> narcotics, firearms, and sexual offenses. Additionally, federal
> authorities have seized enormous amounts of illicit drugs, including
> more than 44 million fentanyl pills and nearly 70,000 pounds of
> methamphetamine.

Until next week,



[Contribute]
[[link removed]]


[advertisement]
[[link removed]]


[32x32x1]
[[link removed]]

[32x32x2]
[[link removed]]

[32x32x3]
[[link removed]]

[32x32x3]
[[link removed]]

Judicial Watch, Inc.
425 3rd St Sw Ste 800
Washington, DC 20024

202.646.5172



© 2017 - 2025, All Rights Reserved
Manage Email Subscriptions
[[link removed]]
|
Unsubscribe
[[link removed]]

View in browser
[[link removed]]