Supporters of Republican Donald Trump filed a federal lawsuit trying to halt Wisconsin’s ongoing presidential recount, and Michigan’s attorney general on Friday sued to stop a recount from happening in his state.

The Wisconsin lawsuit and motion for a temporary restraining order was filed late Thursday in U.S. District Court in Madison by the Great America PAC, the Stop Hillary PAC and a Wisconsin voter, Ronald R. Johnson. The legal filings contend that the recount is unconstitutional because it doesn’t satisfy equal protection requirements under the law and may not get done by the Dec. 13 federal deadline to certify the vote, putting Wisconsin’s electoral votes in jeopardy.

No court hearings had been scheduled as of Friday morning. The Wisconsin Department of Justice was reviewing the lawsuit, said Johnny Koremenos, spokesman for Attorney General Brad Schimel.

Ibbitson: The two sides of Trump

Related: Clinton team to take part in U.S. presidential recount in Wisconsin, Trump blasts effort

Green Party candidate Jill Stein, who requested both recounts and a third in Pennsylvania, has suggested that Trump and his backers would try to delay the recounts to make them hard or impossible to complete by the Dec. 13 deadline for states to certify their election results or have their electoral votes be decided by Congress, which is controlled by Republicans. A spokeswoman for Stein’s campaign didn’t immediately respond to a message seeking comment Friday.

With workers in Wisconsin busy re-counting votes for a second day, Michigan’s state elections board was meeting about the Trump campaign’s request to deny Stein’s recount request.

In his request to the Michigan Supreme Court to block the hand recount, Attorney General Bill Schuette, like the Trump campaign, argued that Stein cannot seek the “frivolous” recount because she was not “aggrieved” to the point at which a potential miscounting of votes could have cost her the election. She garnered 1 per cent of the vote in Michigan.

The earliest a Michigan recount could start would be next week. In Pennsylvania, a hearing is scheduled for Monday on Stein’s push to secure a court-ordered statewide recount there.

Elections officials in all three states have expressed confidence in their results. President-elect Trump won all three states by narrow margins.

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker echoed that sentiment Friday, telling reporters that he doesn’t expect his state’s recount to significantly change the results.

“Anytime there’s a canvass or a recount there’s slight adjustments, but I don’t think you’re going to see a significant adjustment,” the Republican governor said.

Walker also said he’s open to changing the state’s election laws to prevent minor candidates from being allowed to request recounts. Stein finished a distant fourth in Wisconsin with a little more than 1 per cent of the vote.

Trump won Wisconsin by about 22,000 votes, or less than 1 percentage point, over Clinton. Stein requested the recount which began on Thursday and had to be done by Dec. 13.

There is a “realistic risk” the recount may not be done in time of the deadline and the “chaotic rushing necessary” to meet the deadline “creates an imminent unreasonable risk of error that can lead to votes being erroneously counted, disregarded, or diluted,” the motion for a temporary restraining order in Wisconsin contends.

Michigan’s elections board on Friday was considering Trump’s request to block a hand recount of all 4.8 million ballots cast in the state. He defeated Clinton there by about 10,700 votes.

In their filing to the election’s board, Trump’s lawyers argued that Stein, a “bottom-dwelling candidate,” shouldn’t be allowed to force an expensive and time-consuming recount. They also said in their objection that Stein waited until the last minute to file her recount petition Wednesday, making it impossible to finish by the Dec. 13 deadline.

Stein countered Thursday that Trump’s “cynical efforts to delay the recount and create unnecessary costs for taxpayers are shameful and outrageous.”

The first reporting of recount results was expected Friday in Wisconsin.

Recounts were not expected to flip nearly enough votes to change the outcome in any of the states.

Stein has argued, without evidence, that irregularities in the votes in all three states suggest that there could have been tampering with the vote, perhaps through a well-co-ordinated, highly complex cyberattack.</s>LANSING (AP) President-elect Donald Trump and his supporters went to court Dec. 2 to prevent or halt election recounts in Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, less than two weeks before the states would have to complete the tasks to meet a federal deadline to certify their election results.

The legal actions seeking to block or halt the recounts in three states Trump narrowly won could cause delays that would make them extremely difficult or impossible to complete on time. Even if the recounts happen, though, none would be expected to give Democrat Hillary Clinton enough votes to emerge as the winner.

The recounts were requested by Green Party candidate Jill Stein, who says they’re necessary to ensure that voting machines weren’t hacked, even though there’s no evidence that they were. Critics say Stein is simply trying to raise money and her political profile while building a donor database.

“In an election already tainted by suspicion, previously expressed by Donald Trump himself, verifying the vote is a common-sense procedure that would address concerns around voter disenfranchisement, “Stein said in a statement. “Trump’s desperate attempts to silence voter demands raise a simple question: why is Donald Trump afraid of these recounts?”

Wisconsin is the only state where a recount is underway. It began Thursday, and one of the state’s 72 counties had already completed its task by Friday, with Clinton gaining a single a vote on Trump. Clinton lost to Trump in Wisconsin by about 22,000 votes, or less than 1 percentage point.

Two pro-Trump groups, the Great America PAC and the Stop Hillary PAC, along with Wisconsin voter Ronald R. Johnson went to federal court late Thursday to try and stop the recount. U.S. District Judge James Peterson on Friday rejected their request for a temporary restraining order to immediately halt the recount, saying there was no harm in allowing it to continue while the court considers their lawsuit. A hearing on the lawsuit is scheduled for Dec. 9.

The lawsuit says Wisconsin is violating the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2000 Bush v. Gore ruling because it doesn’t have uniform standards to determine which votes should be counted in a recount. They also argue that it threatens due process rights because it may not get done by the federal deadline to certify the vote, putting Wisconsin’s electoral votes in jeopardy.

If states miss the deadline, Congress would allot their electoral votes.

The Wisconsin Department of Justice was reviewing the lawsuit, said Johnny Koremenos, spokesman for Attorney General Brad Schimel.

Michigan’s elections board deadlocked Friday on a Trump campaign request to deny Stein’s recount request and on how a recount would be conducted. Both Republican members voted to prevent the recount while both Democrats voted to allow it, meaning it likely would begin Wednesday unless the courts intervene. It also would be conducted by hand, as Stein requested.

In separate lawsuits against the state, Michigan’s Republican attorney general and Trump asked state courts to prevent the recount, saying Stein should not be allowed to seek one because she finished so far behind Trump and Clinton that she couldn’t have won, even if some votes were miscounted. Stein got about 1 percent of the vote in all three states.

The Michigan courts appeared unlikely to rule immediately, with one asking for a response from state elections officials by Tuesday.

In Pennsylvania, a hearing is scheduled for Monday on Stein’s push to secure a court-ordered statewide recount there. Republican lawyers filed a motion that was posted on the court’s website Friday accusing Stein of engaging in legal antics and saying her recount request endangers Pennsylvania’s ability to certify its electors by the federal deadline.

Stein has argued, without evidence, that irregularities in the votes in all three states suggest that there could have been tampering with the vote, perhaps through a well-coordinated, highly complex cyberattack.

Elections officials in the three states have expressed confidence in their results.

Trump defeated Clinton in Wisconsin by about 22,000 votes, or less than 1 percentage point. His margin of victory in Michigan was even slimmer, at about 10,700 votes out of 4.8 million cast.

An updated count Friday by Pennsylvania election officials showed Trump’s lead over Clinton in that state had shrunk to 49,000 from 71,000, as more counties wrap up final tallies. That put Trump’s lead at 0.8 percent, down from over 1 percent, out of 6 million votes cast. It’s still shy of Pennsylvania’s 0.5 percent trigger for an automatic statewide recount.</s>The first candidate-driven statewide recount of a presidential election in 16 years was set to begin Thursday in Wisconsin, a state that Donald Trump won by less than a percentage point over Hillary Clinton after polls long predicted a Clinton victory.

The recount requested by Green Party candidate Jill Stein carries none of the drama of the Florida presidential recount of 2000, when the outcome of the election between Al Gore and George W. Bush hung in the balance. Almost no one expects Stein’s push for recounts in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania to result in a Clinton victory over Trump.

“This is certainly not Bush v. Gore,” said Wisconsin’s chief elections administrator Mike Haas.

But still, county election officials across Wisconsin were hiring temporary workers, expanding hours and dusting off recount manuals to prepare for the work of retabulating nearly 3 million ballots.

Most counties will manually recount the ballots, although Stein lost a court challenge this week to force hand recounts everywhere. The state’s largest county, Milwaukee, was recounting the ballots by feeding them through the same machines that counted them on election night. In Dane County, where Clinton won 71% of the vote, the ballots will be counted by hand.

Clinton lost to Trump by about 22,000 votes in Wisconsin.

Wisconsin election officials have less than two weeks to complete the recount. Dec. 13 is the federal deadline to certify the vote to avoid having the fate of Wisconsin’s 10 electoral votes decided by Congress. Even if that were to happen, the votes would almost certainly go to Trump, since Republicans control both chambers of Congress.

Stein has argued, without evidence, that irregularities in the votes in all three states suggest that there could have been tampering with the vote, perhaps through a well-coordinated, highly complex cyberattack.

Her critics, including the Wisconsin Republican Party, contend that she’s a little-known candidate who is merely trying to raise her profile while raising millions of dollars. Stein had raised nearly $7 million, about twice as much as her longshot presidential campaign, to pay for the recounts.

The Wisconsin recount was estimated to cost about $3.9 million, while Stein paid $973,250 for the one in Michigan.

Stein filed a lawsuit Monday in Pennsylvania to force a recount there.</s>I first want to take back every nasty thing I've ever said -- or mostly, just privately thought -- about Jill Stein, the Green Party candidate for President. I still think she is a blasphemous powder keg of progressive self-immolation. But at this exact moment I love her so much I could marry her (if President Donald Trump still allows that in two months).

It's not because I think her push for a recount in three of the closest states will see the results there overturned. It's unclear whether the recount will reveal any legitimate evidence of hacking or widespread vote manipulation. It's also unclear whether the recount, combined with Trump's continued baseless whimpering about voter fraud , will lead to any long-term diminution of public faith in our political process.

But what Stein has done is not only attempt to rehabilitate her image, but rehabilitate a sense of hope at a particularly desperate and dark moment for more than half the country.

According to the popular vote tally, which shows that more than half of the country voted for Hillary Clinton and against hate mongering, misogyny and xenophobia, most of the nation has been in a state of depressive shock. Even for those of us who are all too aware that racism isn't dead, that sexism is still a thing and that in our culture, celebrity beats substance and anger beats hope, the election result was still a stunning blow.

If half of American voters are anything like me, then they have been feeling hopeless and bereft ever since Clinton conceded. And if they are anything like me, they were really friggin' furious at Stein on November 9. After all, it's one thing to run an insurgent third-party candidacy that has no chance of winning but still serves to highlight the deep flaws within the major parties and our political system in general. But it's entirely something else to continue such a campaign in a clearly close election in which one candidate's awfulness is unprecedented.

Of course, it's impossible to know how the election would have turned out had Stein and other third-party candidates not been in the race. Perhaps some of their voters would have just stayed home. But according to a CNN analysis , votes cast for third-party candidates in several of the closer states -- such as Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Florida -- may have been enough to influence the outcome of the election. Certainly, it seems safe to assume that many if not most of Stein's supporters were progressives who saw themselves as falling to the left of Clinton, but might have been persuaded to vote for Clinton to stop Trump -- had Stein encouraged them to do so. Speculation aside, it's pretty safe to say that while a lot of us woke up feeling deeply sad on November 9, Stein probably woke up feeling guilty. So while I'm not in Stein's head -- or else, obviously, I would have told her to drop out of the election in the swing states -- I have to imagine that at least part of the reason for her push for a recount in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania is atonement. It's a bit late, but it's something. Join us on Twitter and Facebook At the least, Stein can push for an accountable recount while raising the issue of whether our electronic voting systems are vulnerable to hacking. Meanwhile, Clinton may benefit without having to risk looking hypocritical, although chastising Trump for lying about the extent of nonexistent voter fraud is quite different from pursuing honest inquiries into untested and potentially vulnerable electronic systems. Plus, paradoxically, Stein could argue her sustained candidacy is actually a good thing, as staying in the race meant she was in a stronger position to ensure that the counts were conducted in a fair way. That's not exactly enough to rewrite the unfortunate history of Stein's deleterious influence in this election, but it's one heck of an olive branch to the very depressed and hopeless progressive side of the political ledger. Ultimately, in the coming weeks and months, brightness will gradually find its way in for progressives as the American public finds ways to mobilize in response to the looming travesty of a Trump administration. That response will help shed light on Trump's dark agenda. But in the meantime, as Democrats try to rally from the shock of the election, Stein has given us a glimmer of hope -- and that's something for which I am incredibly grateful.</s>This Week on the Blabbermouth Podcast: Jill Stein and the DEMONocracy

Episode 78 explores whether Dan Savage can say something nice about Jill Stein now that she's spearheading a recount in three states. After that, we turn to your letters, DEMONocracy, and other pressing matters.

Can Dan Savage say something nice about Jill Stein now that she’s leading a recount charge in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania? And why does Sydney Brownstone see a "successful” recount leading to blood in the streets? We answer all these questions and more right of the bat.

Then we perform oral readings of two great listener comments—one voiced by Heidi Groover and the other by Charles Mudede.

After that: a segment we’re calling Rich Smith’s Glossary of Ocracies. (You gotta listen to find out.)

And finally, Stranger social media manager Jessica Fu tries to talk me down off the “Facebook is killing democracy" ledge I climbed out on last week.

Plus, as always, the music of Ahamefule J. Oluo.</s>Wisconsin plans to begin a recount Thursday morning of votes cast in the presidential election, but in a blow to Green Party candidate Jill Stein, a judge ruled Tuesday night that the procedure does not have to happen entirely by hand.

"I follow the law. That's who I am despite my personal opinions," said Dane County Circuit Judge Valerie Bailey-Rihn, the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel reported. "It's [the counties'] decision. It's their discretion. I may disagree with it ... but I must follow the law."

The Wisconsin Elections Commission announced Tuesday that it had received nearly $3.5 million from Stein's campaign to pay for the recount. The state said it would bill Stein for any additional costs.

State officials said the recount would begin at 9 a.m. Thursday and that all county-level efforts must be completed by 8 p.m. on Dec. 12.

Stein's campaign expressed disappointment that the state would give counties the option of a hand recount or a machine recount, but said it would press ahead nonetheless.

"Tonight's ruling will not deter our efforts, and we will continue to work with the Wisconsin Elections Commission to see this recount through," Stein attorney Matthew D. Brinckerhoff said in a statement Tuesday.

State Attorney General Brad Schimel, a Republican, expressed a different perspective, saying in his own statement that he was "very pleased with the Judge's decision, particularly because she followed the law enacted by the legislature that sets the parameters for a hand recount."

Wisconsin is one of three states where Stein is moving ahead with plans to force a recount, citing concerns about the possibility of hacks in the vote tally, although she has presented no evidence of malfeasance. She has taken legal action to try to force one in Pennsylvania and says she is planning to ask for one in Michigan on Wednesday.

Republican Donald Trump defeated Democrat Hillary Clinton by one percentage point in Wisconsin. Stein finished well behind both candidates.

The Michigan Republican Party, speaking on behalf of President-elect Trump's team, said Tuesday that it sees a potential recount there as a waste of time and state resources. But it would not say whether it would file a legal challenge to stop one if Stein follows through on her pledge.

The Clinton campaign has joined the recount efforts initiated by Stein, although her team has said it does not expect the outcome of the election to be reversed.</s>Green Party presidential nominee Jill Stein on Wednesday requested a full hand recount of Michigan’s presidential vote, making it the third state where she’s asked for another look at a race narrowly won by Republican Donald Trump.

Stein had previously requested recounts of the presidential votes in Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

President-elect Trump defeated Democrat Hillary Clinton by 10,704 votes out of nearly 4.8 million ballots cast in Michigan, but Stein alleges that irregularities and the potential for hacking into scanning devices call the results into question.

Michigan’s recount could start as early as Friday, though a challenge to the recount by Trump could delay it.

Trump’s victory is highly unlikely to be reversed in any of the states, but Stein has said the recount will ensure the integrity of the election.

Republicans have said a Michigan recount would cost taxpayers far more than the $973,000 Stein must pay when filing her recount petition.

Meanwhile in Wisconsin, where Trump defeated Clinton by roughly 22,000 votes, Stein’s campaign said Wednesday that it won’t appeal a judge’s ruling that Wisconsin’s recount can be done without counting every ballot by hand.

Stein spokeswoman Margy Levinson said in an email that the campaign decided not to appeal the ruling due to the tight time constraints for completing the Wisconsin recount, which begins Thursday.

The majority of Wisconsin counties planned to do a hand recount of ballots cast even though the judge’s ruling means they can choose to feed the ballots into tabulation machines to double check the counts.

Levinson said Stein’s focus will be on verifying the vote on the ground and she encouraged counties to voluntarily conduct a hand recount.

Also Wednesday, the Wisconsin Republican Party filed a complaint with the Federal Elections Commission alleging that Stein’s recount effort amounts to illegal co-ordination with Clinton.

The complaint contends that Clinton is the only person who could benefit from a recount and that she illegally helped Stein raise money for the recounts in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Michigan.

Spokeswomen for Stein and Clinton’s campaigns did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Trump defeated Clinton in Pennsylvania by about 71,000 votes, or about 1 percentage point.</s>(JTA) — Jill Stein, the presidential nominee of the Green Party, has requested a full hand count of Michigan’s presidential vote.

Stein made the request on Wednesday in the state where President-elect Donald Trump defeated Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton by less than 11,000 votes, or two-tenths of one percent of the state’s nearly 4.8 million votes.

Stein, who is Jewish, has already requested vote recounts in Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

In Wisconsin, Trump defeated Clinton by some 22,000 votes. In Pennsylvania, Trump defeated Clinton by about 71,000 votes, or one percent of all votes cast.

Trump currently leads Clinton in the Electoral College by 306 to 232. Clinton leads Trump in the popular vote by more than 2.3 million votes.

It is unlikely that the recounts will overturn the election’s results.</s>LANSING, Mich. — Green Party presidential nominee Jill Stein on Wednesday requested a full hand recount of Michigan's presidential vote, making it the third state narrowly won by Republican Donald Trump where she's asked for another look at the results.

President-elect Trump defeated Democrat Hillary Clinton by 10,704 votes out of nearly 4.8 million ballots cast in Michigan, but Stein alleges that irregularities and the possibility that vote scanning devices could have been hacked call the results into question.

Elections officials in all three states have expressed confidence in their election results.

Michigan's recount could start as early as Friday, though a challenge to the recount by Trump could delay it.

Trump's victory is highly unlikely to be reversed in any of the states, but Stein has said the recount will ensure the integrity of the election.

Republicans have said a Michigan recount would cost taxpayers far more than the $973,000 Stein must pay when filing her recount petition.

Meanwhile in Wisconsin, where Trump defeated Clinton by roughly 22,000 votes, Stein's campaign said Wednesday that it won't appeal a judge's ruling that Wisconsin's recount can be done without counting every ballot by hand.

Stein spokeswoman Margy Levinson said in an email that the campaign decided not to appeal the ruling due to the tight time constraints for completing the Wisconsin recount, which begins Thursday.

Most Wisconsin counties plan to recount their ballots by hand even though the judge's ruling means they can choose to feed the ballots into tabulation machines to double-check the results.

Levinson said Stein's focus will be on verifying the vote on the ground and she encouraged counties to voluntarily conduct a hand recount.

The Wisconsin Republican Party filed a complaint with the Federal Elections Commission on Wednesday alleging that Stein's recount effort amounts to illegal with Clinton designed to circumvent the law and public scrutiny.

Stein campaign manager David Cobb said in a statement that Stein is not with anyone and dismissed the complaint as a "PR stunt to push a false narrative that will ultimately have no impact on the recount in Wisconsin."</s>The Wisconsin lawsuit and motion for a temporary restraining order was filed late Thursday in U.S. District Court in Madison by the Great America PAC, the Stop Hillary PAC and a Wisconsin voter, Ronald R. Johnson. The legal filings contend that the recount is unconstitutional because it doesn’t satisfy equal protection requirements under the law and may not get done by the Dec. 13 federal deadline to certify the vote, putting Wisconsin’s electoral votes in jeopardy.

No court hearings had been scheduled as of Friday morning. The Wisconsin Department of Justice was reviewing the lawsuit, said Johnny Koremenos, spokesman for Attorney General Brad Schimel.

Green Party candidate Jill Stein, who requested both recounts and a third in Pennsylvania, has suggested that Trump and his backers would try to delay the recounts to make them hard or impossible to complete by the deadline for states to certify their election results or have their electoral votes be decided by Congress, which is controlled by Republicans. A spokeswoman for Stein’s campaign didn’t immediately respond to a message seeking comment Friday.

With workers in Wisconsin busy re-counting votes for a second day, Michigan’s state elections board was meeting about the Trump campaign’s request to deny Stein’s recount request. The board deadlocked, with both Republican members voting to prevent the recount and both Democrats voting to allow it, meaning it will begin Tuesday or Wednesday unless the courts intervene.

In his request to the Michigan Supreme Court to block the hand recount, Attorney General Bill Schuette, like the Trump campaign, argued that Stein cannot seek the “frivolous” recount because she was not “aggrieved” to the point at which a potential miscounting of votes could have cost her the election. She garnered 1 percent of the vote in Michigan.

In Pennsylvania, a hearing is scheduled for Monday on Stein’s push to secure a court-ordered statewide recount there. Republican lawyers filed a motion late Thursday accusing Stein of engaging in legal antics and saying her recount request endangers Pennsylvania’s ability to certify its electors by the federal deadline.

Trump won all three states by narrow margins over Democrat Hillary Clinton.

Stein has argued, without evidence, that irregularities in the votes in all three states suggest that there could have been tampering with the vote, perhaps through a well-coordinated, highly complex cyberattack.

Elections officials in the three states have expressed confidence in their results. Even if all three recounts happen, they aren’t expected to flip enough votes to change the outcomes in any of the states.

In the lawsuit seeking to halt the recount in Wisconsin, which started Thursday, the plaintiffs say there is a “realistic risk” that it may not be completed by the deadline and that the “chaotic rushing necessary” to meet the deadline “creates an imminent unreasonable risk of error that can lead to votes being erroneously counted, disregarded, or diluted.

Trump defeated Clinton in Wisconsin by about 22,000 votes, or less than 1 percentage point. His margin of victory in Michigan was even slimmer, at about 10,700 votes out of 4.8 million cast.

Echoing arguments made against the other state recounts, Trump campaign lawyers said Michigan’s would be impossible to finish by the deadline, putting Michigan voters at risk of being disenfranchised if the 16 electoral votes were not cast.

“You’re not aggrieved if you want on a lark to foist the taxpayers” with a $5 million bill and “the elections officials to go on a wild goose chase,” attorney Gary Gordon told the board.

Stein lawyer Mark Brewer said “95 percent of what you have heard is legally irrelevant” because Stein met all the legal requirements for a recount. Noting GOP criticism that Stein has made baseless allegations of fraud or errors with machines that scan paper ballots, Brewer said: “The original source of the claim that this election was rigged is Mr. Trump.”
The Jill Stein-initiated recounts begin in Wisconsin.