Appeals Court Strikes Down Our Victory

Some Voters in Jeopardy of Disenfranchisement

The U.S. Appeals Court in a surprising reversal of Judge Marbley's decision sent the provisional ballot case back to the Ohio Supreme Court. As the Dispatch article points out, this was decided by two Bush appointed judges and one Carter era appeals court judge. I do not understand why politics has paid such a large role in how we vote in Ohio. I also do not understand how the court could decide that our settlement with the State is ignored because two voters file a separate lawsuit in a different venue. Our case is exactly on point, and our settlement should be respected and honored. We fought this case for two years, and the case belongs in the federal courts because the Help America Vote Act established the provisional ballots in 2002. Here is the text from the 2002 Law:

Provisional Voting Requirements.--If an individual
declares thatsuch individual is a registered voter
 in the jurisdiction in which the individual desires
to vote and that the individual is eligible to vote
in an election for Federal office, but the name of
the individual does not appear on the official list
of eligible voters for the polling place or an election
official asserts that the individual is not eligible to
vote, such individual shall be permitted to cast a
provisional ballot...

and:
If the appropriate State or local election official
to whom the ballot or voter information is transmitted
under paragraph (3) determines that the individual is
eligible under State law to vote, the individual's
provisional ballot shall be counted as a vote in
that election in accordance with State law.

Since a federal law established provisional voting, it would make sense that the federal court can order how those votes are uniformly counted.

Here is Jennifer Brunner's statement from her website about this case:

"This litigation has already delayed the final certification of the November election. It is our hope that the Ohio Supreme Court will quickly affirm their previous clear guidance “to liberally construe election laws in favor of the right to vote,” so as not to disenfranchise approximately 1,000 Ohio voters with a hyper-technical interpretation of Ohio law."

Now, I do not know who is doing press for Brunner, but did they have to use the word "liberal" when referring to how the notoriously conservative Ohio Supreme Court should order the counting of provisional ballots. Couldn't they have used a better word? Is she just trying to bait them? I too hope that every voter is counted, but I would not say the word "liberal" or "liberally construe election law" in my sound byte. She needs a new press person.

Brian
Posts by Northeast Ohio Coalition for the Homeless staff and Board.