The Daily Fuckup

A progressive daily ledger of Trump-world self-owns, legal pain, policy blowback, and bad-faith chaos.

Skip to the news
Story · September 20, 2024

DOJ’s Wisconsin voting case was about accessibility, not election-fraud claims

By The Daily Fuckup Newsroom · From the September 20, 2024 edition

Election fight drift Confidence 5/5
Climate Courts DOJ Elections Ethics Immigration
★★★☆☆Fuckup rating 3/5
Major mess Ranked from 1 to 5 stars based on the scale of the screwup and fallout.
Correction: DOJ’s Sept. 20 filing was a Help America Vote Act case about accessible voting machines for voters with disabilities, not an election-fraud case.

On September 20, 2024, the Justice Department filed a civil complaint under Section 301 of the Help America Vote Act against the Town of Thornapple, Wisconsin, and asked the court for preliminary injunctive relief. The filing said the town had failed to make an accessible voting machine available in the April 2 and Aug. 13, 2024 federal primary elections. DOJ’s HAVA case page also lists the Thornapple matter as a filing from that date. citeturn0search0turn0search1

That is the record. It is a voting-access enforcement case, not a court ruling, and it does not decide or evaluate broader election-fraud allegations. The dispute turns on whether voters with disabilities could cast ballots on equal terms in federal elections, including before the Nov. 5, 2024 general election. citeturn0search1turn0search2

DOJ’s filing also said the town board had voted in 2023 to stop using the machines it had previously relied on. The department described the case as part of its effort to enforce federal voting-access requirements, and it sought court intervention rather than a political conclusion. citeturn0search1turn0search2

The broader takeaway is narrower than the original spin. This was a concrete civil-rights lawsuit about accessible polling-place equipment. It mattered because it dealt with real voting access for disabled voters, but it did not amount to a finding about fraud, corruption, or the legitimacy of the election system as a whole. citeturn0search1turn0search2

Proof attached

Sources used for this report

These are the source links stored with this report when it was published. Open them directly to inspect the underlying reporting or primary document.

Further reporting

Read other reputable coverage

These links are surfaced automatically only when the audit pipeline finds reputable outside coverage that helps readers compare reporting without rewriting it.

Reader action

Follow the court record

Read the filed complaint, order, or opinion and follow the docket as the case develops. Share the primary documents when explaining what the court has—and has not—decided.

This card only appears on stories where there is a concrete, lawful, worthwhile step a reader can actually take.

Comments

Threaded replies, voting, and reports are live. New users still go through screening on their first approved comments.

Log in to comment

No comments yet. Be the first reasonably on-topic person here.