NCBCP v. Burkman and Wohl
NCBCP v. Burkman and Wohl
NCBCP v. Burkman and Wohl
v.
Defendants.
1. Plaintiffs seek to protect their right to vote safely and without fear. Defendants
sent robocalls to Plaintiffs and other voters for the purpose of intimidating them, or attempting to
intimidate them, from voting by mail. Defendants sent an as-yet-unknown number of robocalls
to multiple states and used false information to scare recipients that they will experience negative
consequences if they choose to vote by mail. Voters were told, “Stay home safe and beware of
vote by mail.” Voters deceived by these messages face a harmful choice: expose yourself and
your family to increased risk of contracting COVID-19 by voting in person, or do not vote.
2. This is an action pursuant to Section 11(b) of the Voting Rights Act (52 U.S.C. §
10307(b)) and Section 2 of the Ku Klux Klan Act (42 U.S.C. § 1985(3)) to secure relief for the
unlawful infringement of voting rights secured by the Constitution and the laws of the United
Case 1:20-cv-08668 Document 1 Filed 10/16/20 Page 2 of 23
States. Plaintiffs are United States citizens and residents of New York, Ohio, and Pennsylvania.
3. Plaintiffs have filed this action to respectfully move this Court for immediate
injunctive relief to halt the irreparable pattern of intimidation, threats, and/or coercion being
engaged in by Defendants and others acting in concert with them that has the purpose and the
effect of unlawfully interfering with the voting rights of lawfully registered voters, and to obtain
redress.
4. As described below, upon information and belief, Defendants and those acting in
concert with them have orchestrated and funded a large-scale robocall campaign aimed at
suppressing votes through intimidation and falsehoods. As set forth below, the robocall
campaign targets voters in areas with significant Black populations and seeks to exploit racially
charged stereotypes and false information intended to dissuade recipients from voting in the
intimidate, threaten and/or coerce voters, or attempt to intimidate, threaten, and/or coerce voters,
and thereby interfere with the free exercise of their right to vote, including on the basis of race.
Indeed, Defendants Burkman and Wohl are currently facing felony charges brought by the
Michigan Attorney General for voter intimidation, conspiracy to violate election law, and related
6. Plaintiffs request that this Court grant relief in the form of, inter alia, declaratory
and injunctive relief preventing Defendants from disseminating any additional robocalls prior to
the conclusion of the election. Without this Court’s intervention, Defendants will continue to
inflict irreparable injury on Plaintiffs and potentially many other lawfully registered voters.
Plaintiffs intend to file a motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction as
-2-
Case 1:20-cv-08668 Document 1 Filed 10/16/20 Page 3 of 23
soon as possible.
PARTIES
501(c)(3) nonprofit, nonpartisan civil rights and racial justice organization founded in 1976 and
community by engaging people in all aspects of public life through service, volunteerism,
of civic engagement, including nonpartisan voter empowerment organizing and training; young
adult civic leadership development; grassroots organizing and issue education; and convening a
diverse coalition of members and state-based affiliates nationwide. NCBCP works to expand,
strengthen, and empower communities, particularly Black communities, to make voting and civic
participation a cultural responsibility and tradition. One of NCBCP’s programs is the Black
Women’s Roundtable (“BWR”), which has numerous state-based networks, including Metro
Detroit. BWR brings together Black women from varying backgrounds and across generations
to strategize and organize to strengthen the power of Black women’s leadership and to advance a
policy agenda focused on the needs of Black women, including the promotion of voting, Census
New York.
-3-
Case 1:20-cv-08668 Document 1 Filed 10/16/20 Page 4 of 23
10. Plaintiff Nancy Hart is a lawfully registered voter residing in Allegheny County,
Pennsylvania.
11. Plaintiff Sarah Wolff is a lawfully registered voter residing in New York County,
New York.
County, Ohio.
13. Plaintiff Karen Slaven is a lawfully registered voter residing in Cuyahoga County,
Ohio.
14. Plaintiff Eda Daniel is a lawfully registered voter residing in Cuyahoga County,
Ohio.
political scam artist, conspiracy theorist, and known fraudster. Wohl, both on his own and
working in cohort with Burkman, has spread odious and false conspiracy theories about
numerous government and elected officials (discussed more below). Wohl has also been
previously investigated for securities fraud by several authorities, including the National Futures
Association, the Arizona Corporation Commission, and the Riverside County District Attorney’s
Office. Wohl’s criminal case for securities fraud in Riverside County is ongoing, and Wohl has
failed to pay the restitution required by the Arizona Corporation Commission for securities laws
violations after it concluded that Wohl defrauded investors. The National Futures Association
-4-
Case 1:20-cv-08668 Document 1 Filed 10/16/20 Page 5 of 23
lobbyist, political scam artist, conspiracy theorist, and known fraudster. He collaborated with
Wohl to spread odious and false conspiracy theories, including many discussed below.
19. Defendant J.M. Burkman & Associates, LLC is a lobbyist firm founded by
Burkman, with headquarters at 1530 Key Blvd., Apt. 1222, Arlington, Virginia. The phone
number listed as the sender for the robocalls is associated with this lobbyist firm.
registered voters with robocalls containing blatant lies about mail-in voting in order to intimidate
those voters into not exercising their right to vote in the November 3, 2020 election.
21. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action under 28 U.S.C. § 1331,
as this case arises under federal law, specifically Section 11(b) of the Voting Rights Act of 1965,
52 U.S.C. § 10307(b) and Section 2 of the Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871, 42 U.S.C. § 1985(3).
22. Venue in this Court is proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) because a substantial
portion of the events giving rise to the Plaintiffs’ claims has occurred in this judicial district.
GENERAL ALLEGATIONS
23. “[S]ince the right to exercise the franchise [of voting] in a free and unimpaired
manner is preservative of other basic civil and political rights, any alleged infringement of the
right of citizens to vote must be carefully and meticulously scrutinized.” Reynolds v. Sims, 377
U.S. 533, 562 (1964). Thus, the right to vote is inherently the right to vote unimpeded by
deception and intimidation. See McCutcheon v. Fed. Election Comm’n, 572 U.S. 185, 191
(2014) (“There is no right more basic in our democracy than the right to participate in electing
-5-
Case 1:20-cv-08668 Document 1 Filed 10/16/20 Page 6 of 23
our political leaders.”). Throughout history, however, bad actors have sought to employ
deceptive election practices, intimidation, coercion and threats in an effort to infringe on the
rights of citizens to vote. Defendants here have orchestrated one such scheme: the use of widely-
fraudulent information and preying on deep-rooted fears and racial stereotypes to suppress votes.
As explained below, Defendants’ actions have intimidated voters, and they must be stopped.
24. Defendants have repeatedly and publicly expressed their intentions to interfere
with voters’ rights in the 2020 presidential election. For example, on February 26, 2019, Wohl
revealed to USA Today that the Defendants planned to interfere with the 2020 presidential
election. Specifically, Wohl stated “that he's already plotting ways to discredit Democrats in the
2020 election with lies and other disinformation, using his large following on social media to
cause disarray similar to what Russians did during the 2016 election.”1
25. These are not merely words; Defendants have taken concrete steps toward this
goal. Last year, Wohl sought investors in a scheme to use fraudulent news stories to suppress
voter turnout and manipulate political betting markets. Wohl’s fundraising documents for the
entity, to be called the “Arlington Center for Political Intelligence,” described how the entity
candidates,” target “important Demographics of Democrat voters in swing districts,” and employ
1
Christal Hayes and Gus Garcia-Roberts, This is How Jacob Wohl Created a Sexual Harassment Accusation
Against Robert Mueller, USA TODAY (Feb. 26, 2019), available at
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/02/26/robert-mueller-hoax-how-jacob-wohl-created-sexual-
harassment-plot/2993799002/.
2
Manuel Roig-Franzia and Beth Reinhard, Meet the GOP Operatives Who Aim To Smear the 2020 Democrats –
But Keep Bungling It, WASHINGTON POST (June 4, 2019), available at
-6-
Case 1:20-cv-08668 Document 1 Filed 10/16/20 Page 7 of 23
26. Consistent with their stated intentions, Defendants are engaged in a coordinated
and calculated effort to interfere with the voting rights of lawfully registered voters in violation
of numerous federal statutes. Specifically, Defendants have orchestrated and funded a large-
scale robocall campaign that is designed to dissuade individuals from voting by mail. This
robocall was first sent on August 26, 2020, to thousands of voters in multiple states, including
27. The robocall came from 703-795-5364, which belongs to Jack Burkman. Here is
28. The robocall begins with a woman introducing herself as Tamika Taylor from
Project 1599. The caller falsely states that (1) police will use information from mail-in voting to
https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/meet-the-gop-operatives-who-aim-to-smear-the-2020-democrats--
but-keep-bungling-it/2019/06/04/5b70f000-7691-11e9-bd25-c989555e7766_story.html.
3
Id.
-7-
Case 1:20-cv-08668 Document 1 Filed 10/16/20 Page 8 of 23
track down old arrest warrants, (2) credit card companies will collect outstanding debts with the
information provided, and (3) the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (the “CDC”) will
Hi, this is Tamika Taylor from Project 1599, the civil rights organization founded
by Jack Burkman and Jacob Wohl. Mail-in voting sounds great, but did you know
that if you vote by mail, your personal information will be part of a public database
that will be used by police departments to track down old warrants and be used by
credit card companies to collect outstanding debts? The CDC is even pushing to
use records for mail-in voting to track people for mandatory vaccines. Don’t be
finessed into giving your private information to the man, stay home safe and beware
of vote by mail.
30. As an initial matter, unlawful robocalls are inherently injurious. The mere receipt
and, in some cases, a drain on the recipient’s phone battery. But the danger caused far surpasses
the everyday nuisance caused by Defendants’ robocalls. Each of the statements in the robocall
regarding these potential uses of voters’ personal information is false and is designed to scare the
listener.
31. Moreover, the tone, tenor, language, and content of the call is designed to deceive
and intimidate Black voters in particular. It is currently unknown who “Tamika Taylor” is, but
this name is similar to Breonna Taylor’s mother, Tamika Palmer, who the press has sometimes
misidentified as Tamika Taylor. Breonna Taylor was a Black woman killed by police in
Louisville, KY, earlier this year. Her story is a key part of the movement for Black lives and
racial justice.
32. “Project 1599” is also not a civil rights organization. While “Project 1599”
conveniently sounds very similar to the New York Times’ “1619 Project,” which documents the
history of slavery and racism, the title likely only relates to Defendant Burkman’s street address.
-8-
Case 1:20-cv-08668 Document 1 Filed 10/16/20 Page 9 of 23
33. Stating that voting by mail information will be used by police intimidates voters if
they or their family members fear attention from law enforcement. Due to a long history of
injustice and systemic racism, including the risk of unwarranted violence, many Black voters
34. Stating that voting by mail information will be used by debt collectors is likely to
intimidate voters with debts. Due to a long history of discriminatory redlining and predatory
lending practices, Black populations are disproportionately indebted and have fewer resources to
35. Stating that the CDC will use vote by mail information to conduct mandatory
vaccination efforts is likely to intimidate voters who do not trust government medical programs.
Such trust is especially low in the Black community due to a history of racist experimentation
and discriminatory practices in such programs, like the Tuskegee Syphilis Study.
36. Viewed in the totality of the circumstances and in the context of the historical
inequities they connote, the language and content of the robocall was designed to resonate with
Black voters.
37. The Defendants also specifically targeted their robocalls to areas with large Black
populations. For example, in a news release dated October 1, 2020, the Michigan Department of
Attorney General reported that nearly 12,000 robocalls were made to residents with phone
numbers from the 313 area code, which services Detroit, Michigan and surrounding areas.
According to the U.S. census data, Detroit, Michigan’s population is 76.8 % black.
38. Similarly, Attorneys General offices in New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio, and
Illinois reported that the same robocall reached residents in their states who live in urban areas
with significant minority populations, including but not limited to, New York City.
-9-
Case 1:20-cv-08668 Document 1 Filed 10/16/20 Page 10 of 23
robocall campaign has reached approximately 85,000 potential voters, including Plaintiffs.
40. Plaintiff NCBCP expends significant resources and effort both to promote Black
participation in the Census and to promote voting and other civic participation by the Black
community. These issues are priorities of NCBCP’s BWR program and its state-based networks,
such as BWR Metro Detroit. BWR has been organizing and working on the ground in Black
communities, including in Detroit, to encourage both Black participation in the Census and in
elections.
41. When Defendants’ began making their robocalls on August 26, 2020, BWR
Metro Detroit learned that members of their community were receiving the calls. BWR Metro
Detroit was immediately and seriously concerned that Defendants’ lies and disinformation would
intimidate and suppress Black voters, whom BWR Metro Detroit works hard to support. They
42. They were also concerned that the false information would cause more voters to
lose trust in mail in voting and instead vote in person. COVID-19 has hit the Black community
particularly hard, so BWR Metro Detroit was concerned that if more Black voters were tricked
43. BWR Metro Detroit diverted staff and resources that were allocated toward
encouraging Census participation to respond to the threat of Defendants’ voter intimidation. For
example, its co-chair stopped her usual work—helping people fill out their Census forms—so
that she could respond to the disinformation. As a result, BWR Metro Detroit’s efforts to
promote Census participation were impaired and fewer people completed the Census. As the
-10-
Case 1:20-cv-08668 Document 1 Filed 10/16/20 Page 11 of 23
Census has concluded, this harm is irreparable. The diversion of resources harms not only the
mission of the NCBCP, but also its constituents in Detroit who risk being undercounted in the
Census and consequently losing their fair share of funding and representation associated with the
Census count.
robocalls, they will need to divert additional resources to protect the communities they serve.
45. Plaintiff Mary Winter is resident of Rockland County, New York, where she is
registered to vote. She voted in the primary election by mail-in ballot and intended to vote in the
November 3, 2020 general election by mail-in ballot. Because of the COVID-19 outbreak for
which there is currently no cure or vaccine, Ms. Winter does not think it is safe for her to vote in
person. During the course of the pandemic, she has been very careful in her virus precautions
(particularly given that she lives in a County currently experiencing a high volume of COVID-19
cases), has remained socially distant from almost everyone, and does not even go to the grocery
store anymore. In addition, prior to receiving the robocall, Ms. Winter had doubts about the
integrity of voting through the mail-in ballot process due to reports she had seen in the media but
was still planning to vote by mail-in ballot. Ms. Winter’s receipt of Defendants’ robocall has
46. Ms. Winter received the robocall on August 26, 2020, and was so immediately
distressed by it, that she shared it with her partner, Plaintiff Gene Steinberg. At first, she thought
the robocall might originate from a legitimate source but soon realized the nefarious intentions
behind the call when the speaker’s allegations turned to mandatory vaccines. Even though she
knows that the robocall is fraudulent, the robocall has exacerbated her fears that someone will
-11-
Case 1:20-cv-08668 Document 1 Filed 10/16/20 Page 12 of 23
tamper with her mail-in ballot or violate its secrecy. As Ms. Winters describes it, “[i]f someone
is willing to go to the lengths of creating a false robocall to lie and scare people from voting by
mail, . . . what else might they be willing to do to block my mail-in ballot[?]” The robocall has
intimidated Ms. Winter to the point where she is no longer planning to vote by mail and instead
has decided to vote in person, despite the increased risks of contracting COVID-19 and
47. Plaintiff Gene Steinberg is resident of Rockland County, New York, where he is
registered to vote. He voted in the primary election by mail-in ballot and intended to vote in the
November 3, 2020 general election by mail-in ballot. Mr. Steinberg is Ms. Winter’s partner and
lives with her. Like Ms. Winter, Mr. Steinberg has been vigilant in avoiding exposure to
COVID-19 and was planning to vote via mail-in ballot to avoid any unnecessary risk. Because
48. Mr. Steinberg heard the robocall because Ms. Winter played it for him
immediately after she received it. Mr. Steinberg has many of the same concerns that Ms. Winter
does with regards to mail-in ballots, and the robocall further undermined any confidence in that
method that remained. In addition, Mr. Steinberg found the robocall to be “traumatic” for him
due to his personal history. He has a nonviolent criminal conviction from more than 18 years
ago. Given his history with law enforcement, Mr. Steinberg was particularly fearful after
hearing the robocall’s threat that law enforcement would use mail-in ballots to track voters. In
fact, this threat has so “profoundly scared [him],” Mr. Steinberg now has “great anxiety” and is
reliving earlier traumas as a result. Mr. Steinberg has been intimidated by the robocall to the
point where he is no longer planning to vote by mail and instead has decided to vote in person,
despite the increased risks of contracting COVID-19 and spreading it to his partner.
-12-
Case 1:20-cv-08668 Document 1 Filed 10/16/20 Page 13 of 23
49. Plaintiff Nancy Hart is resident of New York County, New York where she is
registered to vote. Ms. Hart received the robocall on August 26, 2020 (even though her phone
number is registered with the Do Not Call registry). Ms. Hart was “irate” upon listening to the
robocall because she understood the call to be a voter suppression tactic. Ms. Hart was also
angry at the fact that the robocalls specifically targeted Black voters by preying upon real fears
that exist within the Black community about the police, predatory debt collectors, and
government-mandated medical programs. Ms. Hart’s concerns about the robocall have only
grown deeper since receiving the robocall because she has observed others on social medial
repeating the false information disseminated by the robocall. Ms. Hart is so fearful that
Defendants might be successful in their efforts to intimidate voters that she called the
50. Plaintiff Sara Wolff is resident of New York County, New York where she is
registered to vote. Ms. Wolff received the robocall on August 26, 2020 (even though her phone
number is registered with the Do Not Call registry). Because Ms. Wolff knew that the robocall’s
information was a lie and that the purpose of the robocall was to intimidate her, the robocall
infuriated her. Ms. Wolff likewise found the call to be “disgusting” because it was a clear effort
to intimidate voters from exercising their right to vote and because she understood the robocall’s
51. Plaintiff Kate Kennedy is resident of Cuyahoga County, Ohio where she is
registered to vote. Ms. Kennedy is married to Plaintiff Karen Slaven and they received the
robocall at their home where they live together on August 26, 2020. The robocall angered Ms.
Kennedy because she understood this call to be an attempt to scare her into not voting by mail.
She is also worried that other voters will be scared by the call.
-13-
Case 1:20-cv-08668 Document 1 Filed 10/16/20 Page 14 of 23
52. Plaintiff Karen Slaven is resident of Cuyahoga County, Ohio where she is
registered to vote. Ms. Slaven is married to Ms. Kennedy and they received the robocall at their
home where they live together on August 26, 2020. Ms. Slaven understood this call to be an
attempt to scare her into not voting by mail, and she is worried that other voters will be scared by
53. Plaintiff Eda Daniel is resident of Cuyahoga County, Ohio where she is registered
to vote. Ms. Daniel received the robocall in late August or early September, 2020 (even though
her phone number is registered with the Do Not Call Registry). Ms. Daniel was understandably
disconcerted, and also scared, by the robocall. Ms. Daniel is well-familiar with the processes of
voting as she serves as a precinct official for her county, and she believes that this robocall is an
attempt to harass voters and intimidate them—and her—from voting. The robocall also left her
feeling powerless and vulnerable; she felt as if a stranger had just invaded her home with
pernicious lies in order to intimidate her. Ms. Daniel was so concerned that Defendants might be
successful in their efforts to intimidate voters that she called her congresswoman, U.S. senator
54. Plaintiff Andrea Sferes is resident of Westchester County, New York where she is
registered to vote. Ms. Sferes received the robocall on August 26, 2020 and also on or around
Labor Day. Ms. Sferes had never heard of Project 1599, Jacob Wohl, or Jack Burkman. When
she listened to the call, Ms. Sferes was shocked, furious and sickened. Ms. Sferes understood the
call to be an attempt to dissuade people from voting by mail. Since she has outstanding debt
related to medical bills, Ms. Sferes began to worry whether her information would really be
shared and tried to convince herself otherwise. The robocall resulted in emotional distress that
lasted multiple days after the call, and led her to voice her dismay to friends.
-14-
Case 1:20-cv-08668 Document 1 Filed 10/16/20 Page 15 of 23
citizens who are lawfully entitled to vote from voting and giving their support and advocacy in a
legal manner toward and in favor of the election of a lawfully qualified person as an elector for
President and Vice President and as a Member of Congress of the United States. The conspiracy
consists of, at least, Defendant Burkman, Defendant Wohl, Defendant Project 1599, Defendant
J.M. Burkman & Associates, LLC, and the speaker who identified herself on the robocalls as
“Tamika Taylor.” The purpose of the conspiracy is to send voter intimidation robocalls.
Defendants committed numerous overt acts in furtherance of the conspiracy, including each
robocall call to the individual Plaintiffs and others. Defendants conspired to create and
strategically disseminate the robocalls in an effort to suppress the vote. Intimidating voters into
refraining from voting by mail or from voting at all is an interference with those voters’ giving of
56. In the alternative, Defendants’ conspiracy, by targeting Black voters and using
intimidation to deprive them of their right to vote, seeks to deprive a class of persons of equal
57. The Defendants know or reasonably should know that their actions have the effect
of intimidating, threatening, and/or coercing Plaintiffs, and tens of thousands of other potential
voters, in connection with exercising their right to vote by mail in the November 3, 2020
election. Indeed, that Defendants intended for their robocalls to intimidate voters is apparent
from the robocall’s last statement: “Stay home safe and beware of vote by mail.” Defendants do
not just want voters, particularly Black voters, to vote by mail—they do not want them to vote at
all.
-15-
Case 1:20-cv-08668 Document 1 Filed 10/16/20 Page 16 of 23
Defendants Are Facing Criminal Charges Arising From Their Robocall Campaign.
58. Defendants’ actions have not escaped the notice of law enforcement authorities.
On October 1, 2020, the Michigan Attorney General announced the filing of felony charges
against Burkman and Wohl in connection with the robocalls at issue in this case, to the extent
they targeted voters in Michigan. Each was charged with one count of intimidating voters, one
count of conspiracy to commit an election law violation, one count of using a computer to
commit the crime of intimidating voters, and using a computer to commit the crime of
conspiracy, all in violation of Michigan state law. As a condition of bail, Defendants Burkman
and Wohl have been ordered to not “initiate or cause anyone else to initiate any robocalls or
other communications directed at multiple recipients” until after the election.4 However, these
are state law charges from just one state. Defendants sent their robocalls to many other states
outside of the jurisdiction of the Michigan Attorney General, including each of the states in
59. There is no reason this Court should assume that Defendants—individuals who
have turned being liars and fraudsters into full-time jobs—will adhere to the Michigan court’s
order. Indeed, Defendants’ long-history of disregard for the law and undermining confidence in
elected officials whom Defendants deem to be opponents is well-documented. In the last two
individuals to lie—to bring sexual misconduct allegations against Special Counsel Robert
4
Gregory Lemos and Chandelis Duster, Ring-Wing Political Operatives Arraigned on Felony Voter Intimidation
Charges Charges for Robocalls, CNN POLITICS (Oct. 8, 2020), available at
https://www.cnn.com/2020/10/08/politics/jack-burkman-jacob-wohl-robocall-voter-intimidation-charges/index.html.
-16-
Case 1:20-cv-08668 Document 1 Filed 10/16/20 Page 17 of 23
Mueller,5 Minnesota Congresswoman Ilhan Omar, former South Bend, Indiana Mayor and then-
presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren, and White House Coronavirus Task Force member Dr.
Anthony Fauci. Although these allegations were debunked, Defendants have been undeterred in
their reckless chase of fraudulent schemes. Just last month, Defendants hired actors on Craigslist
to stage an FBI raid on Burkman’s home, which he falsely alleged was retaliation by government
officials.
60. In short, Burkman and Wohl have long been engaged in a game of lies and fraud
with the goal of undermining fair and free elections. Indeed, employing robocalls to further their
fraud is nothing new: In 2019, Burkman and Wohl used robocalls in a failed effort to solicit
derogatory information about Joe Biden. Defendants have shown over and over again their
including Plaintiffs. Being denied the right to vote via intimidation is an irreparable harm; the
voter permanently loses that opportunity to vote. Similarly, a voter suffers an irreparable, and
potentially fatal, harm when they feel compelled to expose themselves to heightened COVID-19
risk in order to vote in person because they do not trust vote by mail due to intimidation and
deception.
prevented from voting—or are impaired by having to vote in person instead of by mail—in the
5
Andrew Prokop, The incredibly shoddy plot to smear Robert Mueller, explained, VOX (October 30, 2018),
available at https://www.vox.com/2018/10/30/18044110/robert-mueller-jacob-wohl-jack-burkman-surefire.
6
Wohl’s refusal to pay the restitution imposed by the Arizona Corporation Commission further demonstrates his
disregard for lawful authorities. In addition, Defendants’ staging of an FBI raid with actors potentially violates the
federal statute making it a crime to aid and abet the false impersonation of federal agents. See 18 U.S.C. § 912.
-17-
Case 1:20-cv-08668 Document 1 Filed 10/16/20 Page 18 of 23
upcoming November 3, 2020 election because of Defendants’ actions, there will be no way to
undo or remedy this damage. If Plaintiffs, or other potential voters, do not vote in the November
3, 2020 election as a result of Defendants’ actions, their vote in that election is forever lost.
Enough is enough.
CAUSES OF ACTION
63. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the preceding paragraphs as if fully set forth
herein.
64. Section 11(b) of the Voting Rights Act provides in relevant part: “No person,
whether acting under color of law or otherwise, shall intimidate, threaten, or coerce, or attempt to
intimidate, threaten, or coerce any person for voting or attempting to vote[.]” 52 U.S.C. §
that personal information provided in connection with mail-in voting would be used by (i) the
police to make arrests, (ii) credit card companies to collect outstanding debt, and (iii) the CDC to
66. Defendants’ conduct violates Section 11(b) of the Voting Rights Act, which
prohibits all actual or attempted “intimidation,” “threats,” or “coercion” against a person, either
67. Defendants’ actions have the effect of intimidating, threatening, and/or coercing,
voters in connection with voting or attempting to vote in the November 3, 2020 election.
68. Defendants’ actions are undertaken with the purpose of intimidating, threatening,
-18-
Case 1:20-cv-08668 Document 1 Filed 10/16/20 Page 19 of 23
or coercing lawfully registered voters, so that would be fearful and reluctant to exercise their
69. Unless and until enjoined by the Court, Defendants will continue to intimidate,
threaten, and/or coerce, or attempt to intimidate, threaten, and/or coerce, lawfully registered
voters, such as Plaintiffs, in violation of Section 11(b) of the Voting Rights Act.
70. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the preceding paragraphs as if fully set forth
herein.
71. Plaintiffs bring a claim under clause 3 of 42 U.S.C. § 1985(3), which as set forth
(emphases added).
have conspired to intimidate and threaten many thousands of eligible voters, including Plaintiffs,
through targeted robocalls, with the purpose of dissuading such persons from exercising their
-19-
Case 1:20-cv-08668 Document 1 Filed 10/16/20 Page 20 of 23
voting rights and to sow distrust in the electoral system in general, and voting by mail in
particular.
threatening that personal information provided in connection with mail-in voting would be used
by (i) the police to make arrests, (ii) credit card companies to collect outstanding debt, and (iii)
74. Defendants coordinated in the collection of phone numbers and the development
Plaintiffs and causing Plaintiffs to have doubts and fears about voting through mail-in ballots,
and undermined Plaintiffs’ confidence in voting by mail in the November 3, 2020 election.
77. Defendants attempted to intimidate Plaintiffs out of exercising their right to vote
by mail; upon information and belief, in the case of some percentage of the thousands of
unnamed robocall recipients, Defendants no doubt succeeded in coercing such voters out of
78. In the alternative, Defendants’ conspiracy also sought to deprive Black voters of
the equal protection of the laws by targeting the voter intimidation robocalls to Black voters to
79. The object of the Defendants’ conspiracy is to dissuade eligible voters from
casting their vote. Defendants’ message not only discourages the recipients from exercising their
right to vote by mail, but also undermines their basic trust in the electoral process, all with the
-20-
Case 1:20-cv-08668 Document 1 Filed 10/16/20 Page 21 of 23
intended effect of reducing voter turnout. Plaintiff Hart, who spends much of her time as a
journalist and activist encouraging others to vote recognized the robocalls as not solely a form of
voter suppression but also as a direct attack on the institution of voting itself.
1985(3) conspiracy.
81. Plaintiffs experienced distress and fear upon receiving the call. All Plaintiffs
were emotionally disturbed by the receipt of the robocall. Plaintiffs Winter and Steinberg now
intend to vote in person, putting themselves at a higher risk of contracting coronavirus, a direct
a) Declaring that Defendants’ actions as described above violate Section 11(b) of the Voting
b) Declaring that Defendants’ actions as described above violate 42 U.S.C. § 1985(3), the
c) Enjoining Defendants, their agents, employees, and all persons acting in concert with
them, from further undertaking the unlawful actions set forth in the Complaint;
d) Awarding compensatory and punitive damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1985(3), the Ku Klux
Klan Act;
f) Awarding such other and further relief that the Court deems reasonable and just.
In the near future, Plaintiffs also intend to file a request for a temporary restraining order
-21-
Case 1:20-cv-08668 Document 1 Filed 10/16/20 Page 22 of 23
prohibiting Defendants, their agents, employees, and all persons acting in concert with them,
from further undertaking the unlawful actions set forth in the Complaint.
-22-
Case 1:20-cv-08668 Document 1 Filed 10/16/20 Page 23 of 23
Amy Walsh
Rene Kathawala
Rachelle Navarro
Julie Gorchkova
Spencer Bruck
Aaron Gold
Michael Maruca (not admitted in SDNY)
ORRICK HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE LLP
51 West 52nd Street
New York, NY 10019-6142
(212) 506-5000
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
Jon Greenbaum*
Ezra Rosenberg*
John Libby
David Brody*
LAWYERS’ COMMITTEE FOR CIVIL
RIGHTS UNDER LAW
1500 K St. NW, Suite 900
Washington, DC 20005
(202) 662-8600
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
-23-