The Flynn resignation is demonstrative of one of the claims made by Petitioners to the Supreme Court asking for a revote. The ReVote 2017 effort has alleged Russian cyber invasion, and the failure of the government to protect the people as the basis of their claims and justification that the Court should authorize a new election to take place. I have already discussed how the election hacking issue could have happened using a super computer virus as well as a general background related to likely Russian influence.
To be fair, it is important to note that a Petition to the Supreme Court is different from a hearing and so generally, there is a lower chance of success, however, because of the extraordinary circumstances surrounding the current political climate, Petitioners feel they can succeed. It is important to note that if a re-election is authorized, the voting systems need to be completely secured and any potential viruses removed. One way to accomplish this is through an open source voting system which has layers of redundancy built in to protect the people from fraudulent voting practices, while at the same time ensuring voting access to disabled persons. Revoting in a proper way will enable the country to move past the black mark of Russian interference and hacking.
The revote effort does not support any candidate, but rather the right of the people of the US to have free and fair elections. Because of Russian hacking and influence, there have been multiple investigations by Congress and the Senate, but the ReVote effort contends that the only objective way to move forward is to begin again. As the movement picks up steam, there have been some logistical challenges, such as organization and representation. But Petitioners are still undeterred. Here is their latest statement:
To be fair, it is important to note that Jerroll Sanders was stated by the group to be the original creator of the application for the writ to the court itself and is currently in the process of formally copyrighting it. Although this may be disputed by some, there is ample evidence that Ms. Sanders was primarily responsible for writing the document which was eventually submitted to the court.