My bad. I misinterpreted your initial comment and the post actually. 1000s of hours implies all 538 EC votes. I was thinking this was targeted at each of the swing state EC votes. I also thought your initial comment meant that since electors were not explicitly challenged by the legislatures, or that they didn't send dueling electors off the bat that that means the Biden slates of EC voters can't be challenged.
The safe harbor date in 2004 was the 5th. Arnebeck's lawsuit definitely went past that deadline.
As it applies to the quoted law above, since Ohio didn't resolve all challenges before the safe harbor date, it was eligible to be contested on January 6th 2005.
My bad. I misinterpreted your initial comment and the post actually. 1000s of hours implies all 538 EC votes. I was thinking this was targeted at each of the swing state EC votes. I also thought your initial comment meant that since electors were not explicitly challenged by the legislatures, or that they didn't send dueling electors off the bat that that means the Biden slates of EC voters can't be challenged.
Right. A frivolous delay is what I think OP is suggesting. That would be illegal and would set a precedent to be used against us someday.
Was Ohio contested before safe harbor in 2004 when democrats challenged it in January? https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3916189/posts
Yes. Here is one article discussing some of the challenges:. https://www.spokesman.com/stories/2004/dec/03/kerry-campaign-joins-recount-lawsuit-in-ohio/
The safe harbor date in 2004 was the 5th. Arnebeck's lawsuit definitely went past that deadline.
As it applies to the quoted law above, since Ohio didn't resolve all challenges before the safe harbor date, it was eligible to be contested on January 6th 2005.