A Johnson County district judge on Wednesday dismissed a lawsuit brought by a pair of election skeptics who wanted election records preserved for an investigation of the election system.
District Judge James Vano found that neither Hannah Mingucci nor Katie Roberts could demonstrate that they would suffer irreparable harm if the records were destroyed in September after 22 months as required by state law.
Vano said it appeared that the purpose of the lawsuit was intended to keep a “vague” idea alive of undercutting the fact that the 2020 elections are over.
Mingucci and Roberts, who represented themselves in the case, wanted the documents to be available for Sheriff Cal Hayden’s investigation of elections as well as an ongoing legislative audit of the 2020 elections.
While Roberts and Mingucci had collected a large volume of information about election systems, they didn’t make it clear how stopping the destruction of the records would provide any more useful information, Vano said
“It seems instead the prayer for an injunction of indefinite length and purpose is only to keep a vague notion alive to undermine the finality of the 2020 elections,” Vano wrote in his eight-page ruling handed down Wednesday.
“There is no actual contest at hand, and the plaintiff would have no right to do anything with the material,” he wrote.
“That said, if there is a flaw in the election process, undercovering it and correcting it going
forward is a worthy non-partisan project in the best interests of the public.
“It has simply not been made clear to the court how the indefinite retention of certain election year data is necessary to address that goal,” he wrote.
At one point during Monday’s oral arguments on Zoom, Roberts, who is not attorney, said she was a “just a mom” with “incredible instincts.”
“When something feels off, more than likely it’s off,” she said.
Roberts told the judge how she went to bed on election night 2020, thinking Donald Trump had been reelected to a second term as president.
“I woke up to find that they stopped counting, that ballots just started showing up,” she said.
“There were things that were happening that never in the history of my voting record, I’ve ever experienced.”
The lawyer for Johnson County blasted the litigation as a compilation of baseless theories spun about elections nationwide.
Roberts said there was “tons of evidence” that indicate voting machines are not secure, a point that’s been refuted by state and local election officials.
“We just simply want the other side to prove they are not cheating and that our vote actually is who we cast our vote for,” she said.
Vano questioned why the matter was so urgent given that the plaintiffs waited until a month before the records were supposed to be destroyed to file their lawsuit.
“Plaintiffs have made no sufficient showing as to why they waited until the 21st month
to file their petition to enjoin the destruction directed for the 22nd month following the election,” he wrote.
The 22-month provision, Vano noted, had been in the statute since 1988, long before the 2020 election.
“There is no likelihood of prevailing on the merits because there is no reasonable probability of suffering irreparable harm,” Vano wrote.
“The election is over and no longer subject to be contested except in the political arena and public opinion,” he wrote.
“There is no statutory contest available at this time and no contest currently underway.”
Vano said if Hayden needs to the records for his investigation, then Roberts and Mingucci are not the property parties to bring the lawsuit.
If Legislative Post Audit needs the records, the representatives involved in that audit can
make the request on their own, Vano said.
There is a separate lawsuit very similar to the one dismissed in Johnson County still pending in Sedgwick County court.
