Colorado Federal Judge Rejects Voter Intimidation Lawsuit Midway Through Trial
U.S. District Court Judge Charlotte Sweeney ruled on July 18th in favor of three defendants in an election integrity case in Colorado federal court. Sweeney, a Biden appointed judge, found the evidence and testimony presented by the plaintiffs failed to prove intimidation and ended the trial early.
Defendants Shawn Smith, Ashley Epp, and Holly Kasun, founders of the U.S. Election Integrity Plan (USEIP), were accused by The Colorado Montana Wyoming State Area Conference of the NAACP, the League of Women Voters of Colorado, and Mi Familia Vota of violating the Voting Rights Act and the Reconstruction-era Ku Klux Klan Act.
Gregor Wynne Arney attorneys Michael J. Wynne and Cameron Powell represented defendants in the controversial voter intimidation lawsuit. Wynne said the three members of the group had been “dragged through the mud” by the lawsuit.
Cross-examination of two of the plaintiffs’ witnesses undermined allegations of intimidation, leading the judge to question the allegations that Colorado Secretary of State employees were ‘intimidating voters.’
“This has turned into a broader matter than it needs to be. This hearing isn’t about Jan. 6, the Colorado Secretary of State, or the validity of the election,” Judge Sweeney stated in open court. “I want you to focus on what we’re discussing, which is whether these three individuals intimidated voters.”
“This decision is significant in part due to its timing. It is a strike against Lawfare, where national organizations file outrageous and vitriolic lawsuits against community organizers and salt-of-the-earth citizens, then go in search of a voter willing to claim intimidation,” said Michael Wynne, one of the defendants’ attorneys, after the judgment. He went on to say, “There wasn’t anything that any of these individuals did that could be called intimidation.”
“I think Plaintiffs’ organizations engaging in lawfare may want to consider exercising more restraint before taking media reports as fact and spending donors’ valuable resources to try to restrict other people’s speech, even if, and maybe especially if, they disagree with it,” Cameron Powell, defendants’ attorney with Gregor Wynne Arney, said.