out an affidavit ballot and the voting officials try to figure out what went wrong with the records, if anything did as opposed to voter error.

frivolous lawsuit

Committing perjury, is not a good idea.

... Wait ... who else certified, by affidavit, Democratic Party affiliation?

I have not seen the pleadings in this case. I saw one link to the pleadings but my office system blocks opening that link

I never heard of this firm and there is good reason. It is a small personal injury firm and the lead attorney is a 2014 graduate from one of the worst law schools in the country http://publicrecords.onlinesearches.com/view/lid/3242 The pleading is not as bad as the lawsuit in Arizona but is not up the standards of the big firms who know what they are doing. I had never heard of the law school but according to above the law it is a bad one

This will be interesting to see what happens

From what I can tell from the people who were at the hearing just now. It wasn't dismissed and another hearing will be scheduled so the pertinent people can explain what happened.

I guess the judge also allowed individuals harmed the right to request a hearing as well.

Without an injunction granted today, the primary will remain a close primary and the only issue will be how are provisional ballots treated. The claim that this primary should be changed to an open primary was really weak.

It is my understanding that NY law allows people who vote provisionally to attempt to cure the issue if the issue can be cured. People whose registration was somehow wrongfully changed could have contested that through the provisional ballot process. In Texas if a voter registration was wrongfully removed then they could contest that removal under limited situations. There are federal guidelines on when to purge registrations and this issue is litigated in Florida every cycle or so.

It sounds like this lawsuit was a flop

I didn't think that had much merit as well.

The issue for me was to make sure the people who followed the rules are allowed to vote and have them be counted. Before this case it was somewhat uncertain if provisional ballots would be counted in the end.

That claim had no chance and only a stupid baby attorney with no understanding of election law would make that claim.

As for the people who were purged, there have been litigation on this issue and there are ways of fighting these purges unless they followed the required procedure of first putting a voter on a suspense list if they have not voted in the last four or so elections and then waiting another time period. People whose registration were flipped would have been able to contest this by voting provisionally.

I volunteer on voter protection issues and there is a body of law in this area.

Not terrible, but Bianco would have been better. Glad it's not Spatt or Brown.