FINALLY.

AND BIG.

PLEASE READ

Got through to the director of Constituency Affairs for the SOS Office. We had a spirited conversation, to say the least.

I asked him what written legal opinion LaRose based his decision on to ban voter drop boxes beyond one per county....

1/

He said: "I am unaware of any written opinion"

!?!

So...the Secretary of State made a decision this monumental without an actual written opinion from his counsel about what the law actually said--even though he keeps claiming his decision was based on the law.

WTF

2/

So then I asked: the Atty Gen'l has said his own opinion was only days away. Why would the SOS not have waited for it? Why withdraw his request for that opinion?

His answer: because "if the AG said he had the authority to do it" there still would not have....

3/

...been time to add drop boxes.

Yes, that is a stunningly horrible answer.

So I asked, "But wouldn't you have wanted to know no matter what? If you had the authority to do it--when you now say you support the concept--wouldn't you want to know if you could do it?"

4/

And that's when I was told we had discussed this topic enough, and it hadn't been a "productive conversation."

Of course, I then said it had been quite a productive conversation because now we know:

1) it doesn't appear that LaRose ever got any written opinion

&

....

5/

2) they didn't want the AG opinion because it might have given them the authority to add drop boxes, and that would've required the hard work of actually adding drop boxes like so many other states do.

That, my friends, is a totally unacceptable explanation.

Malpractice.

END

One clarification. He said that while he was unaware of a written opinion, that his own lawyers provided their oral opinion about the issue. As a lawyer, I find that to be an unacceptable approach on a decision this big. But that does reflect what he said