I. PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
Plaintiffs seek a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction to prevent Defendants from certifying the 2020 Presidential election. While the First Amended Complaint is sufficient to sustain this relief, Plaintiffs again ask the Court to permit them to amend and base the sought relief on the proposed Second Amended Complaint. Plaintiffs do not seek to enjoin the certification of any other Pennsylvania election.
Plaintiffs, inter alia, seek copies of and a process to inspect the outside envelopes that were canvassed and approved for counting to determine if the statutory requirements were met. Plaintiffs have engaged a statistical expert to determine the number of ballots that were improperly counted based on statistically significant sampling. This procedure of sampling and statistical analysis was approved by Marks v. Stinson, 19 F.3d 873 (3d Cir. 1994), which observed:
Courts, with the aid of expert testimony, have been able to demonstrate that a particular result is worthy of the public's confidence even though not established solely by applying mathematics to the record evidence. See e.g. Curry, 802 F.2d at 1317-19. What is required is evidence and an analysis that demonstrate that the district court's remedy is worthy of the confidence of the electorate.
Id., at 889, f.n. 14.
This principle was applied by the District Court on remand in relying on statistical evidence in removing William Stinson and placing Bruce S. Marks in a Pennsylvania state Senate seat by excluding illegally cast mail-in ballots and finding Marks won the election. See Marks v. Stinson, 1994, U.S. District LEXIS 5273 (E.D. Pa. April 26, 1994). Instantly, if discovery is granted, prior to the hearing, Plaintiffs will examine these envelopes to determine the percentage of mail ballots that were illegally counted – of which Democratic Candidate Joseph Biden won approximately 75% and President Trump 25%, a 50% margin for Biden. Plaintiffs, through statistical expert analysis will then extrapolate this percent to the 1.5 million mail ballots. This simple exercise will determine whether Plaintiffs can prove their case – i.e., that sufficient illegal ballots were counted that changed the election result.2 If so, the Court should set aside these votes and declare Trump the winner.3 In the interim, the certification should be stayed.
