Constitutional Law, Lawyering, Politics

“It Simply Does Not Make Any Sense”: Judge Trashes Election Lawsuit by the Elias Law Firm
(MSNBC/via YouTube)

The firm of former Clinton campaign general counsel Marc Elias has lost another election case in a spectacular fashion. The Chief Judge of the Western District of Wisconsin, James Peterson (an Obama appointee), did not just reject but ridiculed the Elias Law Group challenge to a witness requirement for absentee voting. Elias has been previously sanctioned in court and accused of lying in the Steele dossier scandal by journalists and others.

U.S. District Judge James Peterson ruled against the lawsuit brought by the Elias Law Group, arguing that the witness requirement violated the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and Civil Rights Act of 1964.

The state statute under § 6.87(2) describes what the witness must certify. The statute first sets forth in two sentences what the voter must certify on the ballot envelope. The first requirement concerns the voter certifying that he or she meets the requirements for voting generally and for voting absentee in Wisconsin.

The second requirement is certification that the voter followed the process for preparing the absentee ballot. These are the called the “first voter certification” and the “witness certification.”

The witness certification refers to a witness certifying “all of the above,” which is obviously referring to the language on preparing the absentee ballot.

Elias argued that it requires certification of everything that preceded it on the details of the voter’s record etc.

In the court’s opinion, Judge Peterson expresses disbelief at the lunacy of the Elias argument, writing:

“Normally, the court would begin by searching for other textual clues in the statute. But in this case, the most obvious problem with plaintiffs’ interpretation is that it simply does not make any sense.”

The court then notes that:

“Under plaintiffs’ interpretation, every witness would have to determine the voter’s age, residence, citizenship, criminal history, whether the voter is unable or unwilling to vote in person, whether the voter has voted at another location or is planning to do so, whether the voter is capable of understanding the objective of the voting process, whether the voter is under a guardianship, and, if so, whether a court has determined that the voter is competent. See Wis. Stat. §§ 6.02 and 6.03. Many witnesses would be unable to independently verify much of the required information. The statute allows any adult U.S. citizen to serve as a witness, suggesting that a wide variety of people should be able to do the job…It makes no sense to interpret § 6.87 in a way that would make compliance virtually impossible.

If plaintiffs’ interpretation were correct, it would mean that countless absentee ballots over decades were invalid because the witness certified that the voter was qualified to vote and met the other requirements in the first voter certification, even though the witness had no basis for such a certification.”

However, it gets even wackier. They argued that a simple witness requirement constituted a type of illegal vouching under the Voting Rights Act. This is a reference to the Jim Crow era when a registered voter had to vouch for a new voter, a system meant to prevent African Americans from voting.

The case adds to a long litany of losses and controversies for Elias. That record includes allegations of lying to reporters and subverting voters.

Elias featured prominently in the filings of Special Counsel John Durham. It was Elias who made the key funding available to Fusion GPS, which in turn enlisted Steele to produce his now discredited dossier on Trump and his campaign.

During the campaign, reporters did ask about the possible connection to the campaign, but Clinton campaign officials denied any involvement. Weeks after the election, journalists discovered that the Clinton campaign hid payments for the Steele dossier as “legal fees” among the $5.6 million paid to Perkins Coie.

New York Times reporter Ken Vogel said at the time that Elias denied involvement in the anti-Trump dossier. When Vogel tried to report the story, he said, Elias “pushed back vigorously, saying ‘You (or your sources) are wrong.’” Times reporter Maggie Haberman declared, “Folks involved in funding this lied about it, and with sanctimony, for a year.”

It was not just reporters who asked the Clinton campaign about its role in the Steele dossier. John Podesta, Clinton’s campaign chairman, was questioned by Congress and denied categorically any contractual agreement with Fusion GPS. Sitting beside him was Elias, who reportedly said nothing to correct the misleading information given to Congress.

The Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee were ultimately sanctioned by the FEC over the handling of the funding of the dossier through his prior firm.

The Democratic National Committee reportedly later cut ties with Elias.

Elias has been sanctioned in past litigation. Yet, other democrats have continued to hire Elias despite his checkered past. Elias unsuccessfully led efforts to challenge Democratic losses.  Elias also was the subject of intense criticism after a tweet that some have called inherently racist.

Elias was back in the news in another major defeat in Maryland. He filed in support of an abusive gerrymandering of the election districts that a court found violated not only violated Maryland law but the state constitution’s equal protection, free speech and free elections clauses. The court found that the map pushed by Elias “subverts the will of those governed.”

Elias has been accused of making millions from gerrymandering and challenging election victories by Republicans (while condemning such actions by Republicans as “anti-Democratic”). His work for New York redistricting that was ridiculed as not only ignoring the express will of the voters to end such gerrymandering while effectively negating the votes of Republican voters.

Recently, Elias’ name popped up again in the scandal involving David Hogg and accounting irregularities. Hogg is accused of raising millions to support liberal candidates but allegedly spending only $263,000 on such candidates while paying $83,000 to the Elias law firm.

Previously, when allegations of self-dealing and accounting improprieties were raised with regard to Black Lives Matter, the group’s attorney, Elias, immediately stood out for many. Elias resigned from his “key role” with BLM as the scandal exploded.

It is not known if the Elias Law Group will appeal this stinging rebuke or cut its losses.

153 thoughts on ““It Simply Does Not Make Any Sense”: Judge Trashes Election Lawsuit by the Elias Law Firm”

  3. Slightly OT, but I found the mention of vouching for new voters to be conceptually interesting. No doubt, vouching was historically used as a ploy to keep African Americans and other such groups disenfranchised. However, for any number of reasons, there seems to be no realistic chance of that happening today, even if the vouching practice was resurrected. Frankly, considering the credible concerns about millions of illegal aliens casting votes, the idea has some appeal to me as a potential remedy. Before any of the leftist trolls who haunt this place claim that this is prohitied by the Voting Rights Act of 1965, I did a quick review of that Act, and that does not appear to be the case. What the Act does say on the subject, is that employment of a vouching requirement that appears to be used to prevent anyone from voting based on race, religiion, or other discriminatory criteria by a jurisdiction, is grounds for review of voting procedures in that jurisdiction by Federal examiners. So, would this practice actually have any potential as a remedy for voting by illegals?

    2. You don’t think there are U.S. citizens ready and waiting to vouch for illegals who want to vote? That’s the wolf guarding the hen house. So much more effective to have to produce a secure Real ID showing citizenship status. Then, defend the Real ID state infrastructure from intrusion and corruption by activists.

      1. NJ governor Murphy allowed illegals to have driver licenses (whereas citizens must prove eligibility). Irrespective of that, illegals are allowed to drop off self certified ballots in publicly placed special mail boxes. No need for driver license nor absentee ballot stunts. There is no official protocol to verify any ballots at all. There are 9.2 M people in NJ with 982 k of that illegals. What could possibly go wrong?

      2. pbinca said: “You don’t think there are U.S. citizens ready and waiting to vouch for illegals who want to vote?”

        At least one previous manifestation of vouching limited a registered voter to vouching for only one new voter. I’m not at all convinced that there is one registered voter who would vouch per each of the illegals that will likely get to vote this November under current conditions. I also see no reason why the vouching requirement would be need to be waived if a new voter registrant had “acceptable” official ID; the requirement could be both, not one or the other. I’m just spitballing here. I envision most of the millions of illegals who have entered the US since Biden was inaugurated and are still wandering around, quite a few of them perpetrating burglaries, armed robberies, rapes, and murders, just strolling into the polling place of their choice (with the exception of the polls in a very few red states that are in the process of establishing real citizenry requirements) and being allowed to vote, with virtually no scrutiny. In fact, given the lax or nonexistent ID requirements in many places, I don’t see much of anything that would stop an illegal from voting in multiple jurisdictions, or possibly even multiple times in the same jurisdiction. From my perspective, anything that can limit that scenario that isn’t blatantly unconstitutional would be worthy of consideration. Outside of a few places like Chicago, “vote early, vote often” was, for the most part, previously considered a joke. I’m no longer laughing.

  4. Jonathan: What is it with Marc Elias that caused your obsession with him? Can’t count the number of times you have trashed him in your columns. As an attorney you know that sometimes you lose the first round in court. You either appeal or dust yourself off and go on to the next case. You win some and you lose some.

    The Elias Law Group’s mission is to “fight back against voter suppression and election subversion. By protecting voting rights in state and federal court, our attorneys have helped millions of Americans register to vote, cast their ballot, and ensure that ballot is counted”. And we know DJT and the GOP are engaged in massive voter suppression and subversion this year. So there is a lot of work to do to prevent that–and the Elias Group is leading the effort. Seems you don’t like the work of Marc Elias in protecting voting rights. Why is that?

    And Elias has his share of big court victories. Last month, the SC of Nevada ruled unanimously in favor of Nevadans for Reproductive Freedom. The right-wing GOP in the state didn’t want a measure on the 2024 ballot that would confirm a woman’s right to an abortion. Elia’s attorneys represented NRF and successfully appealed a lower court opinion keeping the measure off the ballot.

    Then, in March, Forbes named Elias to their list of America’s Top 200 Lawyers–noting that Elias “has been on the front lines of election and voting rights law for decades”. Didn’t see your name on the Forbes list. Perhaps, you suffer from what we call in the business “AE”–Attorney Envy–and that is the real reason you continue to trash Elias?

    1. Says Dennis to JT: “You either appeal or dust yourself off and go on to the next case. You win some and you lose some.”
      Dennis is clearly trashing JT because commenters have repeatedly called him (Dennis) out and posted numerous comments about his (dennis’) inability to stay on topic and to make lucid, valid arguments

    2. Poor Denise.

      Elias should have been disbarred long ago.
      He’s worse than Cohen when it comes to being a lawyer.

      -G

    3. “Jonathan: What is it with Marc Elias that caused your obsession with him? Can’t count the number of times you have trashed him in your columns.”

      Dennis: What is it with Jonathan Turley that caused your obsession with him? Can’t count the number of times you have trashed him in your comments.

    4. Is insult by innuendo the best you can do, Dennis? If you travel that route, why not share what YOUR obsession with disagreeing with JT is based upon? You have done it only a daily basis for some time now. Do you “suffer” from what Freud called ‘PE’ –Penis Envy?

      Give us a break, Dennis. You quote the Elias mission statement as some sort of gospel. Can you name one individual (and the documented source providing details) that otherwise was unregistered to vote and that subsequently registered to vote based solely on the actions of Marc Elias in removing an illegal obstacle?

      Dennis, since the Forbes’ America’s Top 200 Lawyers List is the ‘inaugural’ list containing Marc Elias, can we assume that members of that same list are also implicated in lying, deception or actually allowing their clients/boss/co-conspirators to provide false testimony to Congress? If so, would you, being “in the business”, recommend that honest and law-abiding citizens avoid individuals on that list?

    5. Elias is important because he clearly leads the movement to substitute lawfare for politics. You may lawyer this all you like, but most of us would like to see democracy enacted through the ballot box rather than through the courts. Thanks to Elias and his cohorts, protecting democracy has become a buzzword for subverting the democratic process. Abuse of legal process leads quickly to the point we have now reached, where many of us would agree with the tenets of critical law theory, that it is all about power pretending to be about law.

    6. Dennis’ TDS paints himself into a corner and he’s just babbling again.
      Defending the very people responsible for doing the most damage.
      “Give me liberty or Whataboutism.” He always chooses the latter.

    7. Dennis!
      You ignorant BOOB!!
      When did voting for Trump become ILLEGAL or VOTER Suppression???
      Roger V. Tranfaglia

  5. In the big picture… What doesn’t make sense is all these Chutes’n’Ladders paths to voting: Drive-thru voting; ballot harvesting; Vote by mail; ‘Absentee’ voting; ‘Early’ voting….

    The solution (and the firewall against widespread fraudulent voting and tallying) is to go back to basics: On Election Day, show up at the designated polling place, verify your voter registration, and cast your ballot. Period. Full Stop.

    Seriously, if you can’t be bothered to get up off your butt and carry it down to the polling place once every couple of years, you’ve got no (moral) right to vote in the first place.

    2. ***On Election Day, show up at the designated polling place, verify your voter registration, and cast your ballot. Period. Full Stop.***

      ***Seriously, if you can’t be bothered to get up off your butt and carry it down to the polling place once every couple of years, you’ve got no (moral) right to vote in the first place.***

      So what you are saying is that if you are disabled, in hospital, in the military overseas, out of town because of your job requirements, overseas on government service, working 3 jobs to feed your kids, then you have no moral right to vote.

      I am sure the brave men and women serving overseas in the military who fight and die to defend YOUR rights, and who VOTE BY MAIL, will be delighted to know that they lack the morals to cast a vote.

      Spoken like a true cowardly, loser MAGA voter suppressor.

      1. UOCAVA covers overseas military vote-by-mail. Stop lying about in person voting to cover your fraud, leftist criminal.

        1. UOCAVA (Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act) is simply the Federal Act that authorizes absentee voting for the military. It is simply a Federal law that requires the individual states, who administer all elections, to accept absentee ballots from military personnel. Remember that under the Constitution, the individual states administer all elections. The states all have different requirements and eligibility for absentee voting. UOCAVA, as a Federal law, overrides all state law and simply guarantees that all states accept absentee votes from the military.

          The soldiers request an absentee ballot from their home state just like any other citizen, then return it by mail to their home state authority, just like any other citizen. There is no difference in the mechanics of absentee voting.

          You are the one lying about how the military cast their votes.

          I repeat, you are nothing but a lying, cowardly, MAGA voter suppressor.

          1. UOCAVA governs STATE administration of FEDERAL elections for overseas personnel. It is CODIFIED, imbecile.

            Stop lying about your vote fraud, leftist.

            You are the exact type of criminal who must be prevented from voting.

            1. Overseas military have 2 options to vote depending on whether they are registered to vote in their home state.

              If they are not legally registered voters in their home state, UOCAVA compels states to accept an absentee ballot from an overseas soldier only for Federal offices, even though they are not registered voters. In that case the soldier can vote for Federal offices, but not state or local offices.

              If the soldiers ARE legally registered voters in their home state, then UOCAVA compels the state to issue a regular absentee ballot for all federal, state and local offices, regardless of any state eligibility requirements for such a request. In this case the soldier requests a regular absentee ballot from his county Registrar of Voters, which must be issued, and he returns it by mail to his county Registrar of Voters, just like any other citizen.

              What you seem to be saying is that if you do not vote in person then you have no moral right to vote, unless you are in the military.

              You say that overseas military can vote by mail, but nobody else can do so. If you are in hospital, disabled, or just out of town for work then you are an immoral person who forfeits the right to vote.

              What happened to “all men are created equal”, and “all men are equal before the law”.

              Or are some men more equal than others in your MAGA world.

              1. Incorrect, and flagrantly dishonest.

                UOCAVA GUARANTEES overseas military mail-in voting for those deployed overseas. It is fully codified and enforceable.

                You are dishonestly creating a false scenario that more restrictive DOMESTIC voting will somehow prevent deployed overseas military from voting – it won’t.

                You only want to decrease voting requirements to expand the pool of vote fraud, which is enormous and growing, because that is the way you leftist criminals win elections. You cannot win on failed, dangerous ideas, so you are forced to commit fraud.

                And as for nursing home ballots, WI has shown that is a primary source of your fraud, so no, you should not be voting if you are incapacitated. You leftist criminals, however, must have those fraudulent votes for your scheme.

                You leftists have already demolished equality under the law, so do not be surprised when we turn it around and prevent you criminals from voting. Best to eliminate you altogether.

                1. No, I am not saying that banning mail in voting will prevent the military from voting. I agree, they are guaranteed that right by UOCAVA.

                  All I am saying is that if the military has that right, then every other citizen should have that right if they have a valid reason why they cannot get to a polling station.

                  You cannot simply assert that anyone in hospital, or house-bound by a severe illness or disability, or out of town for work is immoral and not entitled to vote.

                  All men are equal.

                  1. You are lying that they will be banned from voting. They will not be banned.

                    You are an intentional liar committing intentional fraud, because you are a leftist criminal. You are immoral for that reason.

                    You SHOULD BE banned because you are a leftist criminal. That is likely to happen. You leftist criminals do not have rights.

  6. Marc Elias and Wisconsin are one stain. Still, I encourage everyone to review the attached, ongoing and oozing “Voting” concerns still remaining in Georgia, (heavily-populated Fulton and Dekalb Counties in particular):
    https://thefederalist.com/2024/05/09/board-refuses-to-have-fulton-county-investigated-for-double-scanning-3000-ballots-in-2020-recount/
    Hint: in involves MUCH more than “3000” votes, e.g.,:
    “There are also 380,761 ballot images from the 2020 Election Day machine count that are ‘not available’ state board member Janice Johnston said during Tuesday’s meeting.”
    “In 2023 the AJC reported that during the audit of the 2020 presidential election in Fulton County, there were ‘several cases’ in which election workers ‘mistyped vote totals or allocated votes to the wrong candidate’ but that the State Election Board simply ‘ordered Fulton County to ‘cease and desist’ from violations in future audits, implement new audit procedures and adequately train elections staff.'”
    Reminder: Joe Biden won the entire state of Georgia by just over 11,000 votes.

    1. Yep, and this one from WI. Sworn deposition –

      She printed 64,000 ballots in the back conference room of City Hall, Room 501. For the Nov.3rd 2020 election. She had city employees and others (CTCL) fill some of those out on the 4th, 6th and other floors of city hall. Then kicked out observers around 10-10:30pm on Nov.3rd. Then brought in large amounts of ballots at 1:15am on Nov. 4th. All illegal, unconstitutional – number one way however the liberals stole the Presidential election in 2020.

      https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2024/05/developing-milwaukee-election-director-claire-woodall-vogg-terminated/

      1. Nothing from the Hoft brothers is credible. If the story is true, cite it from a reliable source. I’m not following a link to that sewer just on the off chance that the blind pig found an acorn and isn’t lying about it.

  7. If we had Public Fraud civil lawsuits, guys like Marc Elias would simply retreat from such unethical excursions of political competition. Similarly, it would make artful liars like Mike Morrell (Huntergate) and Trump (too many to mention) think twice about attempting to dupe the public into submissive consent via a deceptive infowarfare operation.

    The model to be celebrated is Nick Sandmann bringing CNN and WaPo to heel for their defamation, and the way Dominion Voting System stuck it to Fox News for piling onto Trump’s “big lie” at their expense.

    We The People cannot run our country bathed in psyOps showered upon us by clever infowarriors. We need to be told the truth, without sugarcoating, misdirection or comfort-zone-pandering, and this means coming down hard and fast on intentional frauds waged for political gain. The media have shown they cannot be depended on for truthful reportage. That’s the dismal consequence of the Sullivan precedent in the 1960s, which you have to hope will be reconsidered. The 1st Amendment does not allow govt. to police the infospace — a wise principle. But it does allow civil torts as a softer means of deterrence.

    With AI deep fakes now added to the liar’s toolset, time is fleeting to get serious about the public’s right to a political infospace which is honest enough to undergird sound policy decisionmaking. It’s time to test the waters with Public Frauds lawsuits against the most obnoxious whoppers that pop into public view.

  8. Not a good look for attorneys this week. We have Cohen who was for Trump before he was against him, then Avenatti who was against Trump and now is for him, Fanni Willis who is in Appeals court to determine if she should recuse herself. Alvin Bragg and his circus in New York, Judge Merchan who let Stormy Daniels smear the defendant when her testimony was not even required and everyone knew she would testify like a porn comic book and then the judge tried to tell the jurors not to see what he allowed and which we all knew was going to happen.
    I don’t know what’s going on but it sure is disheartening to see attorneys and judges acting this way. We’re not perfect in Indiana but every attorney or judge I have dealt with both on my side or against me was a hard working professional in some tough cases. I was honored to have many as patients. Good hardworking people. This is a stain on the profession. I have at times complimented an attorney on the other side from me for the depth and vigor of his representation of his client.
    I actually became friends with a 2 man attorney team who frequently defended a local employer for work related lung disease and I was usually the expert witness on the plaintiff’s side. And they were relentless. Later when they felt they had a very unwarranted claim for a work related illness they actually sought me out and asked me to testify for them and their employer in a subsequent case and I did. Over time, even as we were still at times on opposite sides, they would keep me up to date on our shared case.
    Certain medical subspecialties more often put you in cases of being an expert witness. It is easier to find truth and justice when the attorneys were diligent, hard working and knew their subjects well. It challenged me to give my best and it eliminated a lot of theatrics and really dumb questions.
    I have much respect for attorneys but I don’t like these latest antics.

  9. To give Elias his due, even absurd legal arguments have a chance of success if you find the right judge. Consider the two lawsuits brought against Trump in New York City.

    2. Exactly. You need look no further than that christfascist, religious extremist Judge Kacsmaryk of Amarillo who presided over the mifepristone fiasco.

  11. These are obviously reasonable requirements to ensure election integrity. Elias’ Interpretation makes perfect sense when you understand they have no Interest in election integrity.

  12. “The irony is that the Elias argument would have made it more difficult to vote absentee, a curious take for a man who portrays himself as the champion of democracy.” That seems to have been Elias’ legal strategy. To invalidate the witness provision, thereby making it easier to vote absentee — and easier to cheat.

  13. ” … But in this case, the most obvious problem with plaintiffs’ interpretation is that it simply does not make any sense. …”

    Si,
    Estoy de acuerdo con el juez, No entiendo Señor.
    {Yes, I agree with the Judge, I don’t understand Sir}

    ¿Dónde firmo la boleta para el presidente Biden?
    {Where do I sign the Ballot for President Biden?}

  14. Good for you JT. A nice long piece on the despicable nature of Elias. But when it comes to trumps convictions in court for fraud, defamation, you seem sympathetic to poor trump who is being maligned. No bias here.

    1. This article isn’t about Trump.
      Too bad he takes up so much space in your head.
      Blame the mainstream media for that, not Mr. Turley.

      1. Just pointing out the fake concern JT has for the rule of law when he lets one side blather incessant BS, obfuscate facts, and otherwise gives trump a pass while being so concerned with the rule of law when someone else does something dumb.

        Go ahead, worship your orange god, just don’t drink his cyanide laced koolaid when his deeds finally catch up with him.

        2. I’m guessing that historians will be very unkind to Trump’s leadership style. Why?…if the U.S. continues its decline in political culture toward mendacity and dysfunction, losing its global “beacon of democracy” status, the blame will be laid squarely at his feet for his untrustworthiness and populist techniques of divisive rancor, paranoia, and cultism.

          If, on the other hand, America undergoes a revival of civility, moderation and rationalist decisionmaking, restoring its leadership and prestige in the world, Trump will serve as the historical demon figure who epitomized unproductive zealotry, distemper, expedient debasement of institutions, and wasted time and energy.

          Despite his sound positions on many policy issues, and the competence of high performers who joined his Administration, he’ll go down in history as unAmerican outlier crippled by major character deficiencies.

          1. I turn the tables on you. You seem to egotistically revel in seeing your own verbose comments being printed every day. Do you stand in front of a mirror and read them out loud to yourself before posting them? In the future, try to cite some FACTS if you want some credibility.

            1. The article was about Marc Elias, and using aggressive lawyer-gaming of the election rules for partisanl advantage. Do you have a constructive suggestion on how to deter those kind of sleazy moves? More than merely whinging about it after the fact? Got some “can do” ideas?

              1. Where- anywhere-in your @10:22 comment (which I responded to) do you mention Marc Elias?

          2. Trump has character flaws, like all of us, but his pale in comparison to those of truly evil people like the Clintons, Joe Biden and Marc Elias. They, and their apologists, are the true enemy of American democracy.

        3. WHAT deeds pray tell?
          You and yours dont want me to vote for Trump…..y’all know what to do……….COWARD!
          Roger V. Tranfaglia

    2. Would you mind terribly if I called you fathead? If brains were electrolytes, how many Gatorades would you have to drink to have some?

  15. The lawyers and judges who redesign laws to fit their political needs have gone too far. They need to answer to the Bar. Where are they?

  16. People like Elias are a disgrace to those who are attorneys practicing law as required by their ethical obligations. Those who engage in stunts like this litigation are nothing more than political hacks, making big time $$ from their well-heeled backers while wasting the time and money of their opponents and overwhelming the judicial system.

  17. Marc Elias & his team of Left Wing Radicals have make a great living off the DEMOCRATS and the Left Wing Dark Money Groups along with his association to the Clinton crowd. Its nice to see even Obama Judges saying NO to Elias group. Also, Elias had bad news from Georgia, with Gov. Kemp signing into law tougher elections laws which Elias opposed.

  18. But does this now mean that the witness is not obligated to at least try to verify that all the conditions of the absentee ballot?

  19. In the first sentence you have gender council. Perhaps you meant general council?? It is difficult to tell these days though 🙂

Comments are closed.