Does anyone know about this??

I saw this online. Anyone else heard?
No link sorry.



Asa Gordon, a retired astrodynamicist and currently Executive Director of the Douglass Institute of Government, has filed a potentially ground breaking suit in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia (Gordon v. NARA, 1:16-cv-02458, filed December 16, 2016). Decisions of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, one notch up, have the same binding precedential value nationwide as those of SCOTUS.

The suit is Mandamus Civil Action under the Administrative Procedures Act seeking to compel the Office of the Federal Register of the National Archives and Records Administration to REJECT Certificates of Votes that record the award of Electors on a winner-take-all basis. The suit alleges that such certificates are ungrounded in State Law, Federal Law or the United States Constitution, and that such award is specically contrary to required proportional allocation of Electors based on Amendment 14, Section 2, as enforced by 2 U.S.C§6.

The suit alleges that the correct allocation of Electors should be: Clinton (291), Trump (244), Johnson (3). IF PLAINTIFF PREVAILS, CLINTON WOULD BE ELECTED PRESIDENT, NOT TRUMP.

The question raised is whether selection of Presidential Electors pledged to Donald Trump on December 19th, 2016 on a "winner-take-all" basis abridged the right of state citizens (who voted for presidential electors pledged to other candidates) violate of the malapportionment penalty clause of the Second Section of the Fourteenth Amendment. Under the plaintiff’s theory of the case, "Certificates of Votes" for 11 states violate the Constitution's Malapportionment Penalty Clause. These eleven states are Alabama, Arizona, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee and Wisconsin.

Allegedly the United States Constitution requires that States allocate their presidential electors in proportion to the popular vote split or suffer the federal statutory mandate to reduce the states' representatives in Congress. Allocation of electors on a 'winner take all' basis without an explicit state election code triggers the malapportionment penalty of Section 2 of the 14th Amendment (Amend.14§2), as implemented by the "reduction of representation" federal statute Section 6 of title 2 of the United States Code (2USC§6). The "reduction of representation" statute creates a remedy for the abridgment of the right "to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice-President of the United States."

Only thing I could locate online was acknowledgement that such case has been filed. The sole document listed is the complaint that is apparently not available for downloading. I have no access to PACER, the government’s controlled access search engine utilized on federal court websites.

https://www.unitedstatescourts.org/federal/dcd/183416/