$25,000
Matching
thru March 14!
Summary
Government resources are being illegally spent on university-student-targeted voter registration drives and get-out-to-vote campaigns. ALL in Campus Democracy Challenge has engaged about 1,000 state universities and technical colleges to use government resources to conduct “student only” voter registration drives (VRD) and “student only” get-out-to-vote campaigns (GOTV) associated with the Civic Nation Campus All In Democracy Challenge. The participating public schools have goals to increase student voter registration rates and student voting rates. Students Learn Students Vote (SLSV) coalition partners work with the state schools to accomplish the VRD and GOTV goals. The participating schools share student information with National Student Clearinghouse and National Study of Learning, Voting, and Engagement (NSLVE); in return, a public school receives from NSLVE a report on student voter registration rates and voting rates. The public school uses the NSLVE reports to monitor its progress towards the goals of increased student voter registration rates and increased voting rates.
Overview
Reason to Invest:
ALL IN Campus Democracy Challenge champions illegally steering taxpayer funding for public university and technical colleges towards student-targeted VRD and GOTV. Taxpayer funds can be spent generally for VRD and GOTV. But, here, the state schools in the ALL IN Campus Democracy Challenge program run student-targeted VRD and GOTV. Investing in this litigation will re-direct taxpayer resources to non-targeted VRD and GOTV.
Team
.jpg)
Gregory M. Erickson
Contact Me: (612) 979-9791
Education University of Minnesota Law School, Minneapolis, Minnesota J.D. - 1997 Honors: cum laude Miami University, Oxford, Ohio B.A. - 1993 Honors: Cum Laude Major: Political History Science Bar Admissions Minnesota Wisconsin United States Supreme Court U.S. Court of Appeals 7th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals 8th Circuit U.S. District Court Eastern District of Wisconsin U.S. District Court Western District of Wisconsin U.S. District Court Northern District of Illinois Representative Cases Advanced Communication Design v. Follett, 615 N.W. 2d 285, 2000 Pergament v. Loring Properties, Ltd., 599 N.W.2d 146, 1999 Digital Resources LLC v. James Loestetter, et. al., 246 B.R. 357, 2000 Past Positions Rider Bennett, LLP, Partner Professional Associations Minnesota Bar Association, Member Hennepin County Bar Association, Member American Bar Association, Member Certified Legal Specialties M.S.B.A. Board Certified Real Estate Specialist
.jpg)
Elizabeth Nielsen
Contact Me: (612) 979-9791
Education University of Illinois College of Law, Illinois J.D. - 2022 Honors: magna cum laude Honors: Rickert Award for Excellence in Advocacy Honors: Paul M. Lisnek Award for Excellence and Ethics in Trial Advocacy Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, Illinois B.A. - 2014 Honors: summa cum laude Honors: Chancellor’s Scholar Major: Political Science Major: Theater Minor: French Bar Admissions Minnesota Michigan Pennsylvania U.S. Court of Appeals 3rd Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals 6th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals 8th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals 9th Circuit U.S. District Court District of Minnesota U.S. District Court Eastern District of Michigan
Erick G. Kaardal
Contact Me: (612)-341-1074
Education University of Chicago Law School, Chicago, Illinois J.D. - 1992 Harvard College Honors: magna cum laude Honors: U.S. Army Reserve Officer Training Corps scholarship Major: Economics Bar Admissions Minnesota Wisconsin U.S. Supreme Court U.S. Court of Appeals District of Columbia Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals 3rd Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals 6th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals 7th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals 8th Circuit U.S. District Court District of Minnesota U.S. District Court Eastern District of Wisconsin U.S. District Court Western District of Wisconsin U.S. District Court Central District of Illinois U.S. District Court Northern District of Iowa U.S. District Court District of Idaho U.S. District Court Northern District of Georgia U.S. District Court Eastern District of Michigan U.S. District Court Western District of Michigan U.S. District Court Western District of Pennsylvania U.S. Court of Federal Claims U.S. Tax Court Representative Cases Republican Party of Minnesota v. White (U.S. Supreme Court victory 5-4), 2002 Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Mansky (U.S. Supreme Court victory 7-2), 2018 Honors Outstanding Contribution to the Cause of Liberty, Institute for Justice Minnesota Lawyer, Lawyer of the Year, 2018 Life Legal Defense Foundation "Defender of Life" Award Winner – 2021 Pro-Bono Activities Republican Party of Minnesota, Past Secretary/Treasurer John Adams Society, Past Chairman Minnesota Chapter of the Federalist Society, Advisory Board Member Past Positions Mohrman, Kaardal & Erickson, PA - since January 1, 2000 Trimble & Associates, Ltd., Associate Attorney, 1994-1999 Faegre & Benson, Associate Attorney, 1992-1994 U.S. Army Reserves, Minnesota and Illinois National Guard, Field Artillery Officer, Captain (retired)
About
Project Pitch :
​
​ALL IN Campus Democracy Challenge’s illegal use of private student data and public resources in student-targeted voter registration drives (VRD) and get-out-the-vote (GOTV) campaigns are rigging federal elections. This nationwide program is a major election integrity problem because there are over 15 million college students nationwide. Even a 10% increase in their voting participation, 1.5 million votes, could tip close federal elections. In presidential swing states, like Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania, the presidential often come down to thousands or tens of thousands of votes. Because of the government targeting its spending toward college students rather than all people, elections are tilted to having more college students vote. This is why the program rigs federal elections. With the proposed investigate-educate-litigate strategy, we will win because the ALL IN Campus Democracy Challenge’s public schools are violating two federal laws: the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) and the Family Educational and Privacy Rights ACT (FERPA). The goal is to stop their illegal disclosures of private driver data and to stop their government-funded student-targeted VRD and GOTV. Taxpayer funds should be redirected to non-targeted VRD and GOTV. In these programs, government funding targets everybody for voter registration and voting, not just the privileged college students.
Problem
-
ALL IN Campus Democracy Challenge’s illegal use of private student data and public resources in student-targeted voter registration drives (VRD) and get-out-the-vote (GOTV) campaigns are rigging federal elections.
-
This nationwide program is a major election integrity problem because there are over 15 million college students nationwide.
-
A 10% increase in their voting participation, 1.5 million votes, could tip close federal elections. In presidential swing states, like Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania, the presidential often come down to thousands or tens of thousands of votes.
-
These organizations are intentionally disenfranchising local voters with there illegal access and use of student data using federal funds.
​
Solution
-
We will use a combination of litigation, messaging, and lobbying to:
-
Influence federal leaders to stop all funding for any university in Wisconsin that illegally participates inthe All In Campus Democracy Challenge. We will also suggest a robust verification process to assure compliance.
-
We will pursue a strong messaging campaign focused during the month of March, prior to the April election. We believe that this timing will engage with people who are concerned about such election fraud.
-
If needed we will file federal lawsuits against the universities that fail to comply with federal law prohibiting such illegal voter activity.
​
​
Viability
​​
-
There is significant probability of project success. The current administration has shown a strong propensity to support just and fair elections. It has also been aggressive in the use of federal funds as a means of obtaining compliance.
-
If forced to litigate, from our perspective, there are clear violations of FERPA and HAVA.
Desired Outcome
We are working for an immediate cease and desist of All In Campus Democracy Challenge access to university data and use of federal funds.
​
​
Organization Information:
​
​
​​
​
​
​
​
Great Education Initiative
The Great Education Initiative is a non-profit organization dedicated to advocating for premium public education. We believe that all students should have access to a high quality education with the resources they need to succeed while aligning with their family's values. We are committed to amplifying the voices of our parents, students, and public school initiatives.
Our mission is to promote a culture of excellence in public education by advocating for the rights of parents, the safety and security of students, and an orthodox education. We are committed to fighting for the future of our youth and the advancement of our public school system.
​
​
​
​
It takes a great deal of work and sacrifice to build a successful enterprise. When the government seeks to derail that success, you have a right to protect the fruits of your labor. Mohrman, Kaardal & Erickson, P.A., defends family-owned businesses, small companies and nonprofits that have been sued by the government.
Our accomplished trial lawyers enable “the little guy” to stand up against the considerable power of the government, whether they are fighting City Hall, the state attorney general or a federal agency. Our team provides actionable advice and legal firepower to push back against government overreach and abuse of power to safeguard business interests and personal liberties.
Milestones
PHASE - 1
​
Investigation/Education $25,000
First, in this phase, we investigate the state college and technical college campuses in certain selected states: Illinois, Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania to determine how ALL IN Campus Democracy Challenge schools use taxpayer funds for student-targeted voter registration drives and get-out-the-vote campaigns. Second, we educate federal and state agency officials of the misuse of taxpayer funds for student-targeted voter registration drives and get-out-the-vote campaigns. The goal is to stop the student-targeted voter registration drives and get-out-the-vote campaigns because such efforts should be directed at all the people–not a specific demographic group. In this instance, college students are illegally preferred by the government over non-college students and everyone else.
Messaging $50,000
In parallel with the initial investigation we must educate both the agencies and the public. The goal is to provide significant pressure from the public to the agencies responsible for oversight and control. We will leverage high impact digital advertising, social media, traditional media and partner organizations to message during the month of March 2025.
​
​
PHASE - 2
​
HAVA complaint and discovery
(if necessary) $75,000
​
If investigation/education does not resolve the issue, then a Help America Vote Act complaint(s) will be filed to adjudicate the violations of the Help America Vote Act (HAVA). The gravaman of the complaint will be that HAVA prohibits government use of the statewide voter registration system to target any demographic population–including college students–and that colleges and universities are prohibited from sharing educational data for any unauthorized purpose under the federal Family Educational Rights Privacy Act (FERPA). The discovery will focus on ALL IN Campus Democracy Challenge and participating universities. The goal is to collect information about their intertwined HAVA and FERPA violations.
​
​
PHASE - 3
​
Summary Judgment Motion Practice $75,000
(if necessary)
If necessary, the summary judgment (also known as summary disposition) motion practice regarding the HAVA violations will be before an administrative law judge. It is in this stage that complainants will present their evidence to the administrative law judge. The evidence will be selected from the discovery responses. There will normally be an oral argument before the administrative la wjudge. The legal standard will be whether the complainants are entitled to judgment as a matter of law and whether there are any disputed material facts precluding judgment. If there is no resolution on summary judgment, the matter proceeds to an evidentiary hearing. The goal is to win on the summary judgment motion based on their intertwined HAVA and FERPA violations.
​​
​
PHASE - 4
​
Appeal (if necessary) $50,000
If necessary, the appeals process will involve challenging the administrative law judge’s decision that no HAVA violations occurred. The appeal will be in state court. The appellate record will be the evidence presented to the administrative law judge. There will normally be an oral argument before the state court. The appellate legal standard will be whether the administrative law judge misapplied HAVA to the facts shown by the record of the administrative proceeding. If there is no favorable resolution in the state courts, the complainants can petition the U.S. Supreme Court for review because HAVA is a federal law.
​
​