President Trump is threatening to undo a Biden victory because of fraudulent votes. He has argued, without evidence, that voting by mail leads to “massive” fraud.

On Monday morning September 21, he told Fox News that he needs a prompt replacement for the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg so that he will have the votes on the Supreme Court to throw out “fake ballots.”

In my August 3 blog I detailed the Attorney General’s authority to seek to enjoin state election results under Sec. 401 of the Help America Vote Act (HAVA). I am now convinced that he will do so.

I am taking the unusual step of sending the August 3 blog, below, once again. If you feel it is appropriate, please circulate this blog on your social media so that the Attorney General’s route to undoing a possible Biden victory will be known to many more Americans than I can reach.


Without mentioning a single word about controlling federal law, our lazy “mainstream” press (together with the conservative rivulets it disdains) is howling about a probable disaster in the ugly stew of in-person and mail-in voting.

Under federal law Attorney General William Barr can create a national legal campaign to selectively undo results certified under state election machinery. Have you seen, heard or read one word of this from the fourth estate? I haven’t.

Here’s how it works:

After the Florida snafu in 2000 leading to Bush v. Gore, the Supreme Court decision handing victory to George W. Bush, in 2002 Congress passed legislation creating a comprehensive method and detailed procedures for supervising federal elections in the Help America Vote Act (HAVA).

The act creates a U. S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC)  to administer HAVA. It has four members, two democrat and two republican commissioners, appointed by the president but selected by the respective congressional leaders.

HAVA, as administered by EAC, sets strict standards for voting systems, provisional voting and computerized statewide registration lists.


While HAVA sets standards for access and security in elections, EAC is charged with creating “voluntary” guidelines to assist the states in running elections in a world of new technology and resultant security concerns.

How does Attorney General Barr get involved? Under Section 401 of HAVA, the Attorney General may bring a civil action in the federal courts for both declaratory (often before the fact) and injunctive relief to enforce the statute’s “election technology and administration requirements.”

In plain English this means that Barr can sue a state before the November 3 election and afterwards if he claims that a state does not meet statutory standards.

There are ninety-four judicial districts in the United States each with a United States Attorney effectively appointed by Barr even though the president is on the paperwork. Without proof, I suggest that today each United States Attorney is drafting complaints and moving papers to file in the federal courts when, as and if election results are not what Barr thinks they should be.

The Biden campaign must now establish a cadre of volunteer lawyers in each judicial district to prepare for the possibility of such cases.

If this preparation is going forward, perhaps such cases seeking declaratory or injunctive relief may be justified. Based on Barr’s partisan behavior up to now, I have my doubts.

The result of these lawsuits, particularly if numerous, is to materially delay election results, and, in some cases undo them.

Frightening. If this is the first time you have heard of this specific method of affecting the election, don’t blame me. Where are you New York Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal?