Three Florida residents initiated a lawsuit against the state itself demanding a recount of ballots in the race for the presidency. A so-called election reform group called Protect Our Elections indicated that it is supporting the three citizens seeking the recount. In Florida, only citizens, and not candidates, can file a lawsuit seeking a re-tabulation of votes in this manner.
The citizens contend that 160,000 ballots have not been counted yet in Florida. They do not provide independent support for this contention. The Office of the Secretary of State indicates this contention is not accurate.
On the other hand, Occupy Democrats contends that the citizens seeking a recount may have a point. The organization contends the 160,000 votes is greater than the plurality of Donald Trump’s vote total in the state. Donald Trump is the declared winner, with a nearly 113,000 lead. The group also contends the uncounted ballots in 2016 is an increase of 233% from the last presidential election year.
Election experts unaffiliated with partisan organizations maintain there is no chance of the tabulation of the alleged uncounted ballots changing the election results. The three Floridians, and Protect Our Elections, contend the lawsuit may reveal isolated election irregularities. This was the contention initially raised by Trump during the election campaign, an allegation for which he was roundly criticized by groups like Occupy Democrats and Hillary Clinton.
The ballots in question are no tabulated because they have been deemed invalid. For example, invalidation occurs when there is an over-vote, or marking the ballot for more than one presidential candidate.
In the final analysis, even the proponents of the lawsuit concede it has no realistic chance of success. In Florida, intentionally filing a lawsuit with no realistic chance of success is classified as frivolous. In theory, trio of citizens who filed this type of lawsuit possibly could expose themselves to monetary penalties for pursuing a frivolous case.
Nonetheless, the citizens group supporting the voters contends that the lawsuit might reveal instances of voter suppression. In fact, voter suppression by definition involves keeping people from the polls in the first instance. This case focuses on ballots that were precluded from tabulation because of alleged voter error. A judge would have to expand the parameters of the lawsuit beyond the actual contentions at this juncture to include a meaningful look at alleged voter suppression.