Footnotes, 71.

Nor does the Court conclude that the fact Heredia has not voted in an election since the Senate runoff election (Tr. 555:13–18) should alter its conclusion given that (a) the county Board of Election stood as a causal intermediary between Defendants and Heredia’s voter challenge, (b) the challenge to Heredia’s eligibility reflected a legitimate question about her residency for voting, and (c) there is no evidence of further actions by Defendants since the Senate runoff election that would reasonably cause her to remain fearful or timid of voting.