Happy Friday, people! We hear this weekend may bring a snowstorm to the middle of the country–so it’s the perfect time to cozy up inside with a good book or an edition of RantCrush. Stay warm and enjoy the last entry of the week!

Malta Criminalizes Conversion Therapy

As America gets ready to inaugurate a new Vice President who has supported conversion therapy, Malta becomes the first European country to criminalize the practice. The new law also supports transgender rights. It will punish anyone advertising or performing the controversial therapy with fines or jail time, and it states: “No sexual orientation, gender identity or gender expression constitutes a disorder, disease or shortcoming of any sort.”

#SoProud of #Malta the land of my ancestors! Malta Outlaws ‘Conversion Therapy,’ a First in Europe https://t.co/NMZwKPKZ0j

— Joseph Gatt (@MeetJoeGatt) December 8, 2016

This is amazing news and hopefully will become the norm everywhere. The Mediterranean island of Malta is the smallest country in the European Union with only 420,000 citizens, but it is really progressive when it comes to LGBT rights and has been called the most gay-friendly nation in Europe.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post RantCrush Top 5: December 9, 2016 appeared first on Law Street.

Michigan Attorney General Bill Schuette filed a lawsuit on Friday to stop the recount of election ballots that Green Party leader Jill Stein has initiated. His argument is that it is expensive and could cost taxpayers millions of dollars. The recount in Michigan has not started yet, and Schuette asked the Michigan Board of Canvassers to reject Stein’s request, claiming that she doesn’t have any evidence of fraud or errors. Since it is pretty urgent, he also filed an emergency motion with the Michigan Supreme Court to look at the issue immediately. “We have asked the court to end the recount which Stein is pursuing in violation of Michigan laws that protect the integrity of our elections,” he said.

It is inexcusable for Stein to put MI votes at risk of paying millions and potentially losing their voice in the Elec College.

— A.G. Bill Schuette (@SchuetteOnDuty) December 2, 2016

The lawsuit says that Stein received only about 50,000 votes of the 4.7 million votes cast in Michigan, and yet she wants a recount to make sure that was the right result. It claims that it will cost taxpayers millions of dollars and criticizes the fact that she waited until three weeks after the election and then requested a recount by hand, which will take a very long time.

But Stein’s campaign paid the fee for filing the request in full, almost $1 million, and has also raised more than $6 million in just a few days to cover the recounts in Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. Her argument for doing so has nothing to do with believing she could win the election; rather it is about transparency and fairness. She wrote in an op-ed in USA Today on Thursday:

In the age of computerized voting machines and unprecedented corporate influence in our elections, our electoral system is under increasing threat. How can every citizen’s voice be heard if we do not know if every citizen’s vote is counted correctly?

Also on Friday, the Board of State Canvassers in Michigan failed to reach an agreement on another objection to the recount effort, this time by Trump’s lawyers. Since the vote was 2-2, the requested recount could theoretically start as early as the beginning of next week. But it all depends on what happens with Schuette’s lawsuit.

The recounts Americans are calling for will help restore trust in our democracy. They’ll also point us to reforms that safeguard that trust.

— Dr. Jill Stein (@DrJillStein) December 2, 2016

Stein bashed the lawsuit, calling it a politically motivated attempt to side with Trump, and said: “Our democracy allows for recounts to ensure the accuracy and security of elections, and today’s move by the Attorney General is yet another frivolous attempt to obstruct this legal process.”

She pointed out that a miscount doesn’t need to have been made on purpose, but as with anything that has to do with machines, glitches do happen. In 2004, 90,000 votes remained uncounted because of calibration problems with the machines in a county in Ohio. Who knows if anything else could be wrong?

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Michigan Attorney General Files Lawsuit to Stop Election Recount appeared first on Law Street.

Despite his transition into the White House, President-elect Donald Trump took time out of his day on Sunday to rehash the election results, going so far as to claim that millions of votes were cast illegally. He made the claim without citing evidence and despite an apparent consensus among election monitors that there was no indication of widespread voter fraud.

President-elect Trump’s comments came as popular vote counts began showing Hillary Clinton’s sizable lead in the popular vote. While Clinton lost the electoral college and the election as a result, it looks likely that she will have a popular vote lead of somewhere between 2.5 to 2.7 million votes, or about 2 percent of all votes cast. This appears to have troubled the president-elect, leading to his claim that enough votes were illegally cast to lose the popular vote.

In addition to winning the Electoral College in a landslide, I won the popular vote if you deduct the millions of people who voted illegally

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 27, 2016

This unprecedented attack on the legitimacy of the same process that elected him president surprised many, particularly because earlier in the day, Trump sent out a series of tweets denouncing the recount effort organized by Green Party candidate Jill Stein. On Saturday, Trump tweeted that the recount effort was a scam.

The Green Party scam to fill up their coffers by asking for impossible recounts is now being joined by the badly defeated & demoralized Dems

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 27, 2016

Last week Stein began raising money to fund a recount in multiple key states, and on Friday, announced that she initiated the recount process in Wisconsin. The Clinton campaign said that it would join in the recount effort, although a lawyer for the campaign indicated that he did not expect the process to change the final outcome. However, that appears to have been enough to upset Trump, who went on to criticize Clinton in several tweets. Trump cited Clinton’s concession speech and statements made during the presidential debates to indicate that she was hypocritically challenging the election after criticizing him for doing the same thing during the campaign.

Just a few hours later, Trump claimed that millions of votes were cast illegally and then alleged that voter fraud occurred in several states. He also claimed that if the popular vote determined the outcome of the election he would have campaigned differently and won that as well.

It would have been much easier for me to win the so-called popular vote than the Electoral College in that I would only campaign in 3 or 4–

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 27, 2016

states instead of the 15 states that I visited. I would have won even more easily and convincingly (but smaller states are forgotten)!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 27, 2016

Serious voter fraud in Virginia, New Hampshire and California – so why isn’t the media reporting on this? Serious bias – big problem!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 28, 2016

Glenn Kessler, the fact-checker at the Washington Post, quickly refuted Trump’s claims and gave his statement a “four-Pinocchio” rating, which is reserved for particularly brazen and false claims. While the exact source of Trump’s statements remains unknown, the claim that millions of non-citizens voted illegally has been making its way around some right-wing media sites.

One of the most notable examples of this argument came from the conspiracy website Infowars, which cited a Twitter user and self-described voter fraud expert who made claims about fraud before election data was even available. The site Infowars is run by Alex Jones, a well-known conspiracy theorist who, among other things, seems to believe that no one died in the 2012 shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut. During the campaign, Jones had Trump on his radio show and after the election, he claimed that Trump called to thank him for his support.

Based on all available evidence, claims of widespread voter fraud are false. Trump’s statements have been criticized by independent monitors and election officials alike. California Secretary of State Alex Padilla said in a statement on Sunday:

It appears that Mr. Trump is troubled by the fact that a growing majority of Americans did not vote for him… His unsubstantiated allegations of voter fraud in California and elsewhere are absurd. His reckless tweets are inappropriate and unbecoming of a President-elect.

ProPublica, a nonprofit investigative news outlet that coordinated a massive effort to monitor the election across the country, also refuted the claim in a series of tweets.

We had 1,100 people monitoring the vote on Election Day. We saw no evidence the election was “rigged” no matter what Stein or Trump say. /1

— ProPublica (@ProPublica) November 27, 2016

Whether Trump genuinely believes that millions of illegal votes were cast or, as many critics speculate, whether he was using his tweets to distract from other potentially damaging reports–such as the conflicts of interest that Trump will face once in the White House–remains to be seen. However, given that the president-elect has openly challenged the legitimacy of the election, it’s possible that his comments may lead to further calls for recounts.

Kevin Rizzo

Kevin Rizzo is the Crime in America Editor at Law Street Media. An Ohio Native, the George Washington University graduate is a founding member of the company. Contact Kevin at krizzo@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Without Evidence, Donald Trump Suggests Millions Voted Illegally appeared first on Law Street.

Welcome to RantCrush Top 5, where we take you through today’s top five controversial stories in the world of law and policy. Who’s ranting and raving right now? Check it out below:

The Election that Will Never End

Over the weekend, Wisconsin began recounting the ballots to see if the totals were right the first time. Green Party leader Jill Stein started the initiative, and on Saturday, Hillary’s campaign team said it will join the effort, after receiving “hundreds of messages, emails, and calls urging us to do something, anything, to investigate claims that the election results were hacked and altered in a way to disadvantage Secretary Clinton,” according to campaign lawyer Marc Elias. Of course some have criticized Hillary for the effort, even calling for punishment.

I Sure Hope @realDonaldTrump Changes His Mind About Prosecuting Hillary Clinton After She Changed Her Mind About Recount #MAGA #AmericaFirst

— Lou Dobbs (@LouDobbs) November 26, 2016

Trump hit back by saying he would have won the popular vote if you deducted the “millions” of illegal immigrants who voted for Clinton.

In addition to winning the Electoral College in a landslide, I won the popular vote if you deduct the millions of people who voted illegally

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 27, 2016

But if that claim was accurate, wouldn’t he be happy to have a recount to make sure only citizens voted?

Recount the whole god damn thing. NOW. @HillaryClinton you have always been a fighter. For god sake, FIGHT NOW. It’s time. This is real. https://t.co/bbnpVvtxOV

— Elliott Lusztig (@ezlusztig) November 27, 2016

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post RantCrush Top 5: November 28, 2016 appeared first on Law Street.

Green Party presidential nominee Jill Stein took on a pretty big project over Thanksgiving weekend–a Wisconsin recount effort. Trump won a narrow, upset victory in Wisconsin. But Stein raised money to look into that victory–citing concerns of election tampering, perhaps from Russian nationals. Now, the Clinton campaign has lent its support–although officials from the campaign don’t seem particularly optimistic.

Stein went after Wisconsin first, given that the deadline to file for a recount was on Friday. She now promises to file in Pennsylvania and Michigan, two other swing states that narrowly went for Trump. In order to support her efforts, Stein has raised more than $5 million (more, CNBC ironically points out, than she raised for her entire presidential campaign).

The margins were indeed thin in those states. According to the New York Times:

In Wisconsin, Mr. Trump leads by 22,177 votes. In Michigan, he has a lead of 10,704 votes, and in Pennsylvania his advantage is 70,638 votes.

But, those are still larger margins than have ever been overcome in a recount. Marc Elias, a lawyer for the Clinton camp explained the campaign’s reasoning for participating, but the statement was decidedly somewhat pessimistic that the recount would change anything:

Because we had not uncovered any actionable evidence of hacking or outside attempts to alter the voting technology, we had not planned to exercise this option ourselves, but now that a recount has been initiated in Wisconsin, we intend to participate in order to ensure the process proceeds in a manner that is fair to all sides. If Jill Stein follows through as she has promised and pursues recounts in Pennsylvania and Michigan, we will take the same approach in those states as well. We do so fully aware that the number of votes separating Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton in the closest of these states — Michigan — well exceeds the largest margin ever overcome in a recount.

President-elect Donald Trump was (unsurprisingly) quite unimpressed with Stein’s effort. He called it a “scam” and said “the results of this election should be respected instead of being challenged and abused, which is exactly what Jill Stein is doing.” But as Elias said: “now that a recount is underway, we believe we have an obligation to the more than 64 million Americans who cast ballots for Hillary Clinton to participate in ongoing proceedings to ensure that an accurate vote count will be reported.” We’ll have to see if Stein’s efforts unearth any new news.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Recount Effort Underway in Wisconsin, Clinton Camp Now Participating appeared first on Law Street.

Welcome to RantCrush Top 5, where we take you through today’s top five controversial stories in the world of law and policy. Who’s ranting and raving right now? Check it out below:

Matt Lauer #LauerstheBar

Matt Lauer was the moderator last night for an open forum with Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. Lauer sat down for a 30 minute interview with each candidate, and the forum was broadcast live on NBC. But as the forum progressed, the audience had a lot of criticism for Lauer. Specifically, many were mad that Lauer didn’t press Trump on statements he made about the Iraq War:

Would be good, maybe, if Matt Lauer had done some ~basic~ research about Trump’s repeated lies before you know, doing an interview with him.

— Chris Geidner (@chrisgeidner) September 8, 2016

And a new hashtag, #LaueringTheBar was created to mock Lauer’s performance:

No one could have predicted that someone who normally does waterskiing squirrel stories would have failed at real journalism #LaueringTheBar

— Arthur Bannister (@NeverMetAMorph) September 8, 2016

Ouch!

Rant Crush

RantCrush collects the top trending topics in the law and policy world each day just for you.

The post RantCrush Top 5: September 8, 2016 appeared first on Law Street.

Jill Stein is the nominee of the Green Party, a left-wing party focusing on environmentalism, grassroots democracy, and social justice. Stein, from Chicago, attended Harvard Medical School and practiced internal medicine in Massachusetts for 25 years. She has run for Governor of Massachusetts, the House of Representatives, other local Massachusetts offices, and was the Green Party’s presidential nominee in 2012. She has served as a Town of Lexington Town Meeting Representative, but has lost her other bids for public office.

Where does Jill Stein stand on some of the prevalent issues of 2016?

Economy:

Jill Stein calls for an economic solution that alleviates economic inequality while simultaneously working toward a greener economy. She calls for such initiatives as a $15 minimum wage, job creation by urging the clean energy industry forward, and democratizing banks, the federal reserve, and public utilities.

Gun Rights and Control:

Stein advocates improving community mental health resources, ending the culture of drug violence, and legalizing marijuana as mechanisms to reduce gun violence. She is in favor of increased local regulation and background checks.

Healthcare:

Jill Stein hopes to replace the Affordable Care Act by extending Medicare to everybody with a single payer public health program. In Stein’s platform, she also advocates lowering the cost of prescription drugs, expanding access to contraceptives and abortion, and enhancing community health resources.

Immigration:

Stein hopes to establish a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants, supports the DREAM act and deferred action for immigrants, and condemns the deportation of law-abiding undocumented immigrants.

Privacy and National Security:

In her platform, Stein expresses dedication to personal security and privacy. She supports the deauthorization of Guantanamo Bay, termination of the executive power to indefinitely imprison citizens, and other top-heavy gestures of national security. Stein also supports the repeal of the Patriot Act.

What are Jill Stein’s priorities?

Jill Stein places high priority on addressing climate change, an unfair economy that caters to corporations and the rich, and social injustice. Her platform consists of 12 points; transitioning to a green economy, establishing jobs, education, and health care as rights, ending poverty, creating a just economy, fostering racial justice, protecting mother earth, freedom and equality, justice, peace and human rights, and empowering the people.

How is Jill Stein polling?

According to the last national poll conducted by Public Policy Polling on July 30, Jill Stein is currently polling at 2 percent.

You can read here about the other third party candidate, Gary Johnson of the Libertarian Party.

Ashlee Smith

Ashlee Smith is a Law Street Intern from San Antonio, TX. She is a sophomore at American University, pursuing a Bachelor of Arts in Political Science and Journalism. Her passions include social policy, coffee, and watching West Wing. Contact Ashlee at ASmith@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Who is Jill Stein? appeared first on Law Street.