(READ) Watchdog group files brief; tries to overturn sanctions on Sidney Powell, Trump lawyer who challenged 2020 election results

Judicial Watch is supporting Sidney Powell’s attempt to to appeal sanctions levied against her and her associates in the 2020 election challenges.

The watchdog group says it has filed an amicus curiae (friend of the court) brief in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.

Judicial Watch argues that the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan abused its discretion in sanctioning Powell and other lawyers involved in the case. 

Powell, gained national notoriety as one of the attorneys who served on the legal team for former President Donald Trump, filing multiple lawsuits (in Michigan, Arizona, Georgia, and Wisconsin) challenging the election results in 2020.

The filing of this amicus brief comes in the case King, et al. v. Whitmer, et al., (Appeal No. 21-1786), in which Powell and other attorneys ask the appeals court to reverse the lower court’s order sanctioning of them. 

Judicial Watch argues that the improper sanctioning lawyers for bringing civil rights litigation on elections will have a chilling effect: 

Voting and election litigation constitute some of the most contentious, political forms of civil rights litigation. These qualities are even more acute in postelection disputes where litigation schedules are compressed and available information is limited and often dynamic. Nevertheless, the prosecution (and defense) of election disputes play an important role in our electoral and political process. 

As a conservative advocacy group that often brings election and voting lawsuits, including those to enforce federal and state election integrity laws, Judicial Watch has a particular interest in the issues at stake here. If the decision of the district court is affirmed, and the Appellants are sanctioned, the precedent will be weaponized to threaten legitimate parties prosecuting election integrity claims.

Judicial Watch Statement, March 15, 2022

“Courts sanctioning lawyers pursuing election law claims in the heat of an election is a dangerous game that could allow election corruption to go unchecked,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “The partisan retaliation and harassment of lawyers involved in litigating the 2020 election dispute is unprecedented and undermines the rule of law – and courts should not take part in it.”

Read the brief here: https://www.judicialwatch.org/documents/king-et-al-and-powell-v-whitmer-et-al-amicus-1786/

The Lemonade Mermaid Store

Unique gifts for Land or Sea Mermaids, Mer-pets and Little Mermaids!

Left: Pastel Beach Necklace $16


Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

9 thoughts on “(READ) Watchdog group files brief; tries to overturn sanctions on Sidney Powell, Trump lawyer who challenged 2020 election results”

  1. I remember reading an article shortly after Powell’s defense in her Dominion defamation lawsuit of “no reasonable person would conclude that the statements were truly statements of fact” came out. I am not a lawyer, but that article made a lot of sense to me. The crux of the article was that Powell was risking being sanctioned because, while her admitting that she made up her claims might work in the defamation lawsuit (Tucker Carlson, for example, used a similar defense some years ago), she had made those same claims in official pleadings with the court. In other words, in an effort to get out from under the defamation lawsuit, she admitted that she had submitted official documents related to one of the many election fraud lawsuits that contained claims that she knew to be false. Judges, apparently, take a dim view of knowingly being lied to.
    This amicus brief by Judicial Watch seems a little almost desperate to me. It’s hard to see how requiring people to tell the truth in their dealings with the court could have a “chilling effect” on political discourse. After all, lawyers routinely present one-sided cases where they cherry-pick the evidence that they present and ignore the rest. But because they aren’t literally lying, they aren’t sanctioned. But lawyers aren’t allowed to make stuff up. And that’s what Powell did. All sanctioning Powell would do is recognize that, while the bar may be low, it isn’t literally on the ground.
    I always have wondered what those who have professed a belief that the 2020 election was stolen would feel about being called (by one of their own, no less) “unreasonable people”. I still do since no one in that camp has commented publicly about it. But, of course, Powell’s admission has done nothing to diminish the fervent belief in voter fraud that so many Trump supporters continue to have.
    But many thanks to SA for reminding us how ludicrous those leading the “stop the steal” movement are.

    1. The only thing ludicrous here is your take on the thing. What does PDL stand for, anyway, Pretty Darn Lame or Pretty Darn Liberal?

    2. Everyone that cares about America should want election integrity. This means a uniform system requiring photo ID in order to vote in U.S. elections. Also means restricting absentee voting. This is common sense.
      This is not voter suppression. It is election integrity and caring about America more than a political party.
      The last election was clearly fraudulent. There were 8 or 9 states that changed the rules without legislative approval which is required by law. There were absentee ballots and voter harvesting all over. In some places more ballots than registered voters. Reviews still going on. However, the MSM, Social Media do not report, they oppress. and manipulate. Unfortunately, the Democratic party, MSM, Social Media do not care about America first!

  2. I shall reply to each of these comments:
    First commenter: The proper response when responding to an argument that you don’t agree with is to provide a rational counterargument, not to call someone names. That is truly juvenile and sad (and disappointing because I like to hear different viewpoints).
    When I see something like this, I assume that the writer has no rational counterargument to provide and so I give the sentiments expressed their due weight accordingly.
    Second commenter: I decided that it was easier just to parenthetically insert my comments into yours.
    Everyone that cares about America should want election integrity (true). This means a uniform system requiring photo ID in order to vote in U.S. elections (this is really what Dems have been arguing for; but Reps have correctly pointed out the fact that the Constitution gives each state the right to set their own rules). Also means restricting absentee voting (Why? Even Trump has said that absentee voting is acceptable. Are you conflating absentee voting with mail-in voting?). This is common sense.
    This is not voter suppression (I didn’t say that it was. My reply simply pointed out that Sidney Powell had admitted that she made up her claims about Dominion. Bringing up voter suppression is a straw man argument.). It is election integrity and caring about America more than a political party.
    The last election was clearly fraudulent (evidence please). There were 8 or 9 states that changed the rules without legislative approval which is required by law (that is a fair point; it is certainly possible that those changes were not done legally and should be reversed; but that doesn’t change the fact that the election was conducted fairly under the extant rules; and many states like Texas made similar changes to the states that we hear about – but we don’t hear about them because Trump won them. And we didn’t hear these complaints before the election – the courts threw out those lawsuits based on this claim because they said that the proper time to bring that claim was before the election, not after. We only heard about them after Trump lost…). There were absentee ballots and voter harvesting all over (I’m assuming that you are really talking about mail-in voting. Many states have had significant mail-in voting for many years without incident. It’s only when Trump lost that it suddenly became an issue. I’m not sure what “voter harvesting” is, but if you mean “ballot harvesting” some states allow that. I’m not aware of any substantiated charges of illegal ballot harvesting. This is another case where specifics are required.). In some places more ballots than registered voters (specifics would be nice because every single time this claim has been made, the actual numbers showed that it wasn’t true). Reviews still going on (The only review that may still be going on is a second one in Wisconsin though there is a lot of noise about some states conducting additional reviews. But this statement implies a high degree of uncertainty which is certainly not the case. Most of the swing states have already conducted multiple audits/reviews/deep dives and concluded that everything was fine. Your simple statement ignores all of that evidence.). However, the MSM, Social Media do not report, they oppress. and manipulate (What is it that the MSM is not reporting? They have dutifully reported the results of the audits/deep dives/recounts in Georgia, Arizona, Wisconsin, and Michigan which showed no significant fraud. What else are they supposed to report? Those are the facts. And they have provided a lot more complete and accurate picture than this newsletter has.). Unfortunately, the Democratic party, MSM, Social Media do not care about America first!
    General comment: Let’s be honest. The 2020 election was subjected to more examination than any in my lifetime. Yet despite the plethora of such investigations, not only has no evidence of significant fraud been found, but fraud believers will barely acknowledge that such examinations have taken place. Instead we get claims of more than 100% turnout or dead people voting or fake ballots delivered in the dead of night, claims which have been investigated and debunked. Yet they won’t go away.
    I’m old enough to remember when it used to be that someone wanting to claim something was expected to provide evidence to back up that claim. Now it seems that the order of the day is that same someone can make a claim about voter fraud, and I am expected to provide the evidence to prove that it’s false. And, to make matters worse, when that evidence is supplied (as in the case of the multiple election investigations), it’s simply ignored.
    If anyone thinks otherwise, the simple solution is to provide evidence to back up whatever claim anyone wishes to make. So, go ahead, give me the evidence.

    1. The obvious lack of crowds at any bidens events compared to Trumps massive crowds everywhere he goes tells me all I need to know. THE ELECTION WAS STOLEN!! Who made the call to stop counting votes in all swing states ??? The commies were so far behind , they had to cheat like hell just to overcome the deficit. So no amount of “word salad” from you will ever change the minds of logical people.

    2. The current position of the Democrats on election integrity is NOT for voter ID but is for permanent mail-in voting to be required in all states Mail-in voting is clearly the easiest fraudulent form of voting. Absentee voters must request a ballot and mail-in ballots are sent to everyone. The Democrats are currently pushing the H.R.1 bill which would prohibit voter ID and REQUIRES ALL STATES to allow permanent mail-in voting. Since the Democrats oppose voter ID for election integrity they will fall back on the same old “that is racist” or “voter suppression” in an attempt to intimidate the proponents of requiring photo ID.
      Yes, the election of 2020 was clearly fraudulent. Yes, very difficult to prove in court since the controlling party (election board or state legislature) in most contested states is the Democratic Party and they obstruct and do not provide any information. Of course if you follow the MSM and Social Media you will not know what is happening since they do not report honestly since they are all part of the Democratic Party. That is why it is easy to say “evidence please”. Only using common sense can you honestly conclude the election was fraudulent (many states changing election procedures which only the state legislature is allowed to legally change, ballots appearing at 4AM, etc.).
      However, no need to obfuscate. The answers to the two questions below will tell the story and show all the evidence you need. These are the two important items of H.R. 1 bill currently being pushed by the Democrats.
      1. Why is the Democratic Party against voter ID.?
      2. Why is the Democratic Party in favor of mail-in voting (the easiest form of voter fraud)? Yes mail-in ballots are used in some states (Democrat states). States that believe in election integrity do not have mail-in ballots.
      Again, election integrity requires Voter ID and restricted absentee balloting. The states should decide if they will allow mail-in ballots. Mail-in ballots is a very bad idea.
      Note, in 2005 the Carter-Baker Commission on Federal Election Reform proposed a system requiring a photo ID in order to vote in U.S. elections. They pointed out that wide spread absentee voting makes vote fraud more likely. Where is the Democratic Party now? At that time they cared about election integrity and thus cared about America.
      One must care first about America not a political party. Unfortunately the Democratic Party, MSM, and Social Media do not care about the well-being of America. If one cares about America one must care about election integrity.

Scroll to Top