Two judges bar party challengers at Polls

[Guest CronoT]

CINCINNATI(AP) Two federal judges Monday barred Republican Party representatives from challenging the eligibility of voters at polling places on Election Day.

 

U.S. District Judge Susan Dlott said that a black couple suing over such challenges would probably be able to prove them unconstitutional. In a similar case in Akron, U.S. District Judge John Adams said it is up to regular poll workers to determine if voters are eligible.

 

In a related ruling in Newark, N.J., a federal judge said a GOP list challenging the registration of 23,000 voters in Ohio unfairly targeted minority voters, and violated a decades-old order prohibiting such tactics. The GOP had claimed many of the names were fraudulent.

 

"The public interest is always served by encouraging people to vote," Judge Dickinson R. Debevoise said.

 

In the Akron ruling, the judge said people appointed as challengers cannot be at the polls for the sole purpose of challenging voters' qualifications.

 

"In light of these extraordinary circumstances, and the contentious nature of the imminent election, the court cannot and must not turn a blind eye to the substantial likelihood that significant harm will result not only to voters, but also to the voting process itself, if appointed challengers are permitted at the polls," Adams said.

 

Republicans wanted to put challengers in many polling places, citing the possibility of tens of thousands of fraudulent voter registrations in a state both President Bush and Democratic Sen. John Kerry say they need to win. The Democrats argued that such challenges were aimed at intimidating black voters and suppressing Democratic turnout.

 

The GOP filed an appeal with a federal appeals court.

 

State Republican Party lawyer Mark Weaver said Republican poll-watchers will still be allowed to be present at polling places to watch and take notes.

 

Dlott ruled on a lawsuit by a black couple who said Republican plans to deploy challengers in largely black precincts in the Cincinnati area was meant to intimidate black voters.

 

Adams' ruling came in a lawsuit from the Akron-area Democratic Party, which claimed that the law allowing registration challenges is unconstitutional because it does not give a disqualified voter a chance to appeal in time to cast a ballot.

 

The GOP registered about 3,500 challengers. The Democrats said they have registered thousands, too.

 

This was on my homepage, and I couldn't quite find a source. You can check, if you want to, though. http://www.rr.com/flash/index.cfm

 

It's under the "News" tab.

 

[EDIT]-So, is my topic going to get close to 100 views before someone posts a reply again?

[bobobrazil1984 0]

What exactly do "party challengers" do? I mean, I know what the official statement is, but its all very vague. In a practical sense, what do they do? I'm in a swing state and I dont wanna be bugged by "party challengers," any of them, about who i'm voting for or stuff like that.

[Vyce 0]

Let the mass voter fraud by the Democrats commence.

[Rob E Dangerously 0]

considering the 35,000 challenges filed in Ohio amounted to nothing.. i'm sure that there'll be havoc tomorrow.

 

anyways, we all know that Jack Grimes is going to win Ohio now

[Guest MikeSC]

Let the mass voter fraud by the Democrats commence.

Well, one could have fun looking into how that judge got her position and what photos she has on her bookcase...

-=Mike

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

In Canada it is up to the DRO alone to decide whether to boot out any party reps who are becoming unruly.

[Guest CronoT]

Let the mass voter fraud by the Democrats commence.

Well, one could have fun looking into how that judge got her position and what photos she has on her bookcase...

-=Mike

Nice wild speculating there, Mike.

[Guest MikeSC]

Let the mass voter fraud by the Democrats commence.

Well, one could have fun looking into how that judge got her position and what photos she has on her bookcase...

-=Mike

Nice wild speculating there, Mike.

I thought you'd like it. Let's just say that her husband is a little wealthy and they tend to give generously to a party that is represented by a jackass.

 

I also find Daschle suing Thune in court because, apparently, his witness claims that observers "rolling their eyes" is voter intimidation.

 

Methinks Daschle is lacking faith in his chances.

-=Mike

[Guest CronoT]

Let the mass voter fraud by the Democrats commence.

Well, one could have fun looking into how that judge got her position and what photos she has on her bookcase...

-=Mike

Nice wild speculating there, Mike.

I thought you'd like it. Let's just say that her husband is a little wealthy and they tend to give generously to a party that is represented by a jackass.

 

I also find Daschle suing Thune in court because, apparently, his witness claims that observers "rolling their eyes" is voter intimidation.

 

Methinks Daschle is lacking faith in his chances.

-=Mike

EITHER party using intimidation tactics is disgusting. I won't pretend that some people from the Dem's won't be doing it, but we all know Florida will be a giant shit storm by this time tomorrow.

[Rob E Dangerously 0]

coming soon to a polling place near you: Bodyguards!

[EricMM 0]

God this whole shit is so durty.

 

I saw a couple of the so called fliers put up by someone in florida, and they're just stupid.

 

I don't care if it was the Reps trying to scare blacks, or Dems trying to infuriate them.

 

This is all sick and needs to stop...

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

In a similar case in Akron, U.S. District Judge John Adams said it is up to regular poll workers to determine if voters are eligible.

 

Yeah, until a faggot lawyer threatens the poll worker with a lawsuit...

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

Just heard on the radio this got overturned (I think this is the same story.)

 

If so, LET THE DISENFRANCHISING BEGIN...

[Rob E Dangerously 0]

I don't think the Ohio Supreme Court can overturn a Federal Court ruling

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

But an appeals court can. Take that, bitches.

 

Here's my question: How the fuck is checking ID, etc. voter INTIMIDATION!? I guess I then practiced in CUSTOMER INTIMIDATION when checking ID for people wanting to buy smokes/getting into R-rated movies/etc...

 

CINCINNATI (AP) - A federal appeals court has cleared the way for challengers to be present at polling places throughout Ohio, ruling early Tuesday that their presence on Election Day was allowed under state law.

 

A three-judge panel of the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 2-1 to grant emergency stays of two federal judges' orders Monday that barred voter challengers from political parties. The judges also consolidated the two appeals, which stemmed from separate lawsuits in Cincinnati and Akron.

 

Both cases had been appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, but John Paul Stevens refused to overturn the 6th Circuit.

 

The federal appeals court said that while it's in the public interest that registered voters cast ballots freely, there is also "strong public interest in permitting legitimate statutory processes to operate to preclude voting by those who are not entitled to vote."

 

The judges also said that smooth and effective administration of the voting laws means that the rules can't be changed hours before the election.

 

The dissent by Judge R. Guy Cole said the citizens of Ohio have the right to vote without the "threat of suppression, intimidation or chaos sown by partisan political operatives."

 

Cole said that partisan challengers are seeking to target precincts that have a majority black population, and that when "the fundamental right to vote without intimidation or undue burden is pitted against the rights of those seeking to prevent voter fraud ..." the court must err on the side of voters.

 

Republicans say they wanted challengers in many polling places because of concerns about fraud. Democrats have accused the GOP of trying to suppress Democratic turnout. Hundreds of thousands of voters have been newly registered in a state President Bush and Sen. John Kerry both say they need to win.

 

Mark Weaver, legal counsel for the Ohio Republican Party, planned to file the GOP response with the Supreme Court prior to the opening of Ohio polls. "We think the 6th Circuit made the right decision," he said. "The state law is an important safeguard against election fraud."

 

He said Republican challengers had been told Monday to show up outside the polls pending the appeals court ruling. David Sullivan, a spokesman for the Ohio Democratic Party, said Democratic challengers would be at the polls to protect voters' rights.

 

"It is unfortunate that a court of appeals has permitted the Republican Party to continue its plan to challenge voters on Election Day, but we were prepared for this outcome," he said in a statement released Tuesday.

 

Two federal judges ruling on separate cases Monday had barred political party representatives from challenging voters at polling places throughout Ohio, saying poll officials should handle disputes over voter eligibility.

 

U.S. District Judge Susan Dlott in Cincinnati said plaintiffs in a lawsuit likely would be able to prove that Ohio's law allowing polling place challengers was unconstitutional. The GOP appealed her ruling to the 6th Circuit.

 

Dlott said the presence of challengers inexperienced in the electoral process questioning voters about their eligibility would impede voting. She ruled in a lawsuit by a black couple who said GOP plans to deploy challengers to largely black precincts in heavily Republican Hamilton County, which includes Cincinnati, was meant to intimidate and block black voters.

 

In the second case, U.S. District Judge John Adams of Akron said poll workers are the ones to determine if voters are eligible. Adams ruled in a suit by the Summit County Democratic Party, which claimed the law allowing registration challenges is unconstitutional because it does not give a disqualified voter a chance to appeal in time to cast a ballot. He wrote that representatives could not be at the polls for the sole purpose of challenging voters' qualifications.

 

The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said the Ohio law authorizing the presence of challengers at the polling places is presumed to be constitutional and "has been on the books for a decade." Based on the two lower court rulings, Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell's office had told county elections boards to bar all challengers from polling places.

 

After the appeals court disagreed in its overnight ruling and allowed the challengers, secretary of state spokesman Carlo LoParo said he assumed poll workers wouldn't learn of the news until voting began at 6:30 a.m. Tuesday.

 

"Our concern at this point is trying to figure out a way to get that information to Ohio's poll workers," he said.

 

Also Monday, the Ohio Supreme Court clarified that political parties are allowed one challenger apiece for each precinct. The GOP registered about 3,500 challengers, and Democrats say they've registered thousands but won't give a specific number.

 

Under state law, voters may be challenged on their citizenship, age or residency. Poll workers generally would challenge someone if his or her signature didn't match the one in the poll book, or if the poll worker recognized the individual as someone who didn't belong in that precinct.

 

Republicans have said they plan to check names of voters against lists of absentee ballots and of people who have died recently.

[Rob E Dangerously 0]

We'll how much stuff gets fucked up due to the challengers

[TheBigSwigg 0]

Actually, KKK, it can be quite annoying. You see, I live in Dayton, OH, now. A few years ago I lived in Hamilton, OH. I got married and moved here a few months ago, and since I'm still in Ohio I didn't have to get a new license. So if they ask for my ID, I'll be told that I can't vote where I'm supposed to. This is why I will bring my registration and my marriage license as my wife will be with me and her License has our new address. But not everyone is this smart.

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

You should have gotten your license updated, hippie, and then you wouldn't have been in that situation.

 

When I moved back to PA last year I registered to vote. Then I bought a house, thus making my address incorrect on my voter registration stuff. I then *gasp!* had to go BACK to the DMV and *gasp! x2!* get my address changed.

 

Like I said before, showing proof you are that person in the voter roll book is NOT intimidation...

[Guest MikeSC]

Well, corruption is very much going to happen:

Judge orders GOP to halt poll tactics

 

Mike Madden

Argus Leader Washington Bureau

 

published: 11/2/2004

 

Daschle sues to stop 'intimidation' of Indians

 

Republican poll workers in Lake Andes were intimidating Native American voters on Monday, a federal judge ruled early today.

 

Republicans may not write down license plate numbers or follow Native Americans from polling places during today's election, U.S. District Judge Lawrence Piersol ruled in a temporary restraining order.

 

The ruling comes after Democratic Sen. Tom Daschle sued his opponent, John Thune, and the GOP in federal court in Sioux Falls on Monday, asking Piersol to stop what Democrats say was intimidation of voters.

 

"This ruling will hopefully ensure that every legitimate voter can vote free of intimidation on Election Day," said Daschle spokesman Dan Pfeiffer.

 

Piersol, whom Daschle chose for the federal bench, released his opinion about 1:45 a.m. today after hearing one witness from each side.

 

Daschle is depending on heavy turnout from Native American voters to win an expected close election.

 

Republicans had not decided whether to appeal, as of early today.

 

"It's a total joke," said Dick Wadhams, Thune's campaign manager. "What you've got is a situation where there is no credible evidence presented and the judge bent over backward for his long-time political pal."

 

Daschle charges that GOP poll observers have been crowding voters, making notes as they voted and writing down license plate numbers of cars bringing them to vote.

http://www.argusleader.com/news/Tuesdayarticle1.shtml

Considering how much of a total clusterfrick 2002 was with Indian reservations having some abnormally high turnout on behalf of Tim Johnson, Daschle managed to win a case that should have been laughed out of court. Given the VERY real possibility of Indians double-voting, Daschle's judge just gave him a possible win where he didn't deserve it.

-=Mike

...Thune is about to get fucked --- again...

[NoCalMike 0]

Yes because everything will be corrupt unless those squeaky clean FAIR-Mongers called Republicans, make sure everything stays clean

[Guest MikeSC]

Yes because everything will be corrupt unless those squeaky clean FAIR-Mongers called Republicans, make sure everything stays clean

SD Democrats have a running history of doing this.

-=Mike

[TheBigSwigg 0]

You should have gotten your license updated, hippie, and then you wouldn't have been in that situation.

 

When I moved back to PA last year I registered to vote. Then I bought a house, thus making my address incorrect on my voter registration stuff. I then *gasp!* had to go BACK to the DMV and *gasp! x2!* get my address changed.

 

Like I said before, showing proof you are that person in the voter roll book is NOT intimidation...

I actually wanted to when I went with my wife to get her new one. They told me not to worry about it and ignored me for the rest of the time I was there.

 

And I'm not a hippie.

 

Hippie.