remedies would remain in place unaltered. There would be harm, however, to the Defendants if the Court were to grant the requested injunction. This Court finds that there are legal remedies for Plaintiffs to pursue and there is no harm to Plaintiffs if the injunction is not granted. There would be harm, however, to the Defendants if the injunction is granted. Waiting for the Court to locate and appoint an independent, nonpartisan auditor to examine the votes, reach a conclusion, and then finally report to the Court would involve untold delay. It would cause delay in establishing the Presidential vote tabulation, as well as all other County and State races. It would also undermine faith in the Electoral System.
Finally, the Court has to determine would there be harm to the public interest. This Court finds the answer is a resounding "yes." Granting Plaintiffs' requested relief would interfere with Michigan's selection of Presidential electors needed to vote on December 14, 2020. Delay past December 14, 2020 could disenfranchise Michigan voters from having their state electors participate in the Electoral College vote.
Plaintiffs rely on numerous affidavits from election challengers who paint a picture of sinister fraudulent activities occurring both openly in the TCF Center and under the cloak of darkness. The challengers' conclusions are decidedly contradicted by the highly-respected former State Elections Director Christopher Thomas who spent hours and hours at the TCF Center on November 3rd and 4th explaining processes to challengers and resolving disputes. Mr. Thomas' account of the November 3rd and 4th events at the TCF Center is consistent with the affidavits of challengers David Jaffe, Donna MacKenzie, and Jeffrey Zimmerman, as well as former Detroit City Election Official, now contractor, Daniel Baxter, and City of Detroit Corporation Counsel Lawrence Garcia.
12
