Trump has won two-thirds of his adjudicated election lawsuits

An analysis of public data conducted by independent physicist John Droz and his team of scientists and engineers shows that Donald J. Trump has won 17 out of 21 adjudicated cases.

Physicist John Droz and his team have compiled a summary report titled "2020 Presidential Election Lawsuits Related to Election Integrity."

The report looks at the 80 lawsuits filed in connection with the 2020 US presidential election by Donald Trump or on his behalf, categorizing the cases by case name and number, date, topic, state, and relevant issues among others.

Perhaps most importantly, the document displays who won and who lost each case.

Thirty-four of the 80 total lawsuits have been either withdrawn, consolidated with other suits, or dismissed due to technicalities such as lack of standing, timing, or jurisdiction, according to sources.

It is important to understand that these cases were dismissed by judges who never heard the evidence of election irregularities or fraud. In other words, the evidence was never presented in court.

Twenty-five of the 46 remaining cases are still ongoing, meaning the winner and loser have not yet been determined.

This means that only 21 of these cases have been completely adjudicated in court. The court heard arguments from plaintiff and defendant and issued a formal ruling.

Trump has won 14 of these cases and lost 7.

In other words, Trump has won two-thirds of the cases that have been adjudicated to date.

Droz published another document explaining that "only three (3) of these lawsuits materially dealt with voter illegalities (citizens voting twice, votes from deceased persons, etc.)," adding "Interestingly, all three of these cases are still open."

Download PDF • 78KB

"Further, just three (3) lawsuits addressed voting machine inaccuracies (purposeful or accidental). One of these was dismissed (due to jurisdiction), one was ruled against (although no discovery was granted), and one is still open (discovery was granted)."

Droz continues, "The likely explanation for so few cases in these two areas is that legally proving fraud or voting machine manipulations are very time-consuming processes, that require substantial investigative work and documentation. There simply wasn’t enough time to do this prior to key points in the process (like the Electoral College)."

Computer Club.png
Computer Club.png
Computer Club.png