Essex502
09-23-2003, 09:47 AM
This just in:
LOS ANGELES (CBS.MW) -- California's gubernatorial recall election should take place Oct. 7, a federal appeals court ruled Tuesday.
An 11-member panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overruled a three-judge panel of the same court and said the election had to take place as previously planned.
The three-judge panel had ruled that the use of punch-card ballots in some counties would violate voter rights. It had ruled that the election should be delayed until March, when new voting machines are to be in place throughout the state.
The ruling is a potential boost to the drive to oust Gov. Gray Davis, a Democrat, and replace him with one of more than 130 rival candidates.
In this latest, 13-page ruling, the 11-member panel determined that the election should go ahead even if there is a chance votes would not be counted properly.
"There is no doubt that the right to vote is fundamental, but a federal court cannot lightly interfere with or enjoin a state election," the court said in its ruling. "The decision to enjoin an impending election is so serious that the Supreme Court has allowed elections to go forward even in the face of an undisputed constitutional violation."
Recall opponents had backed a move to delay the election until California updates all its old punch-card machines with new devices that scan ballots optically. Six counties will have to use the old method, which was a cause for controversy in counting Florida ballots during the 2000 presidential election.
It's unclear whether those who had asked for a delay will appeal the case to the U.S. Supreme Court, said Daniel Tokaji, one of the attorneys involved. "The court has basically punted on the presented issue: whether use of punch cards violates voter rights," Tokaji said. "We could be facing a repeat of Florida 2000 if it's a close election."
Charles Diamond, an attorney for Ted Costa, one of those backing the recall, said the court ruled properly because the three-judge panel was supposed to determine solely whether an earlier ruling by a district-court judge was erroneous.
Diamond speculated that the U.S. Supreme Court, if asked, would decline to review the case. "There's nothing for the Supreme Court to review," Diamond said. "That issue has been laid to rest."
Now...let's get out and make sure everyone votes you can vote that prick out of office!
LOS ANGELES (CBS.MW) -- California's gubernatorial recall election should take place Oct. 7, a federal appeals court ruled Tuesday.
An 11-member panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overruled a three-judge panel of the same court and said the election had to take place as previously planned.
The three-judge panel had ruled that the use of punch-card ballots in some counties would violate voter rights. It had ruled that the election should be delayed until March, when new voting machines are to be in place throughout the state.
The ruling is a potential boost to the drive to oust Gov. Gray Davis, a Democrat, and replace him with one of more than 130 rival candidates.
In this latest, 13-page ruling, the 11-member panel determined that the election should go ahead even if there is a chance votes would not be counted properly.
"There is no doubt that the right to vote is fundamental, but a federal court cannot lightly interfere with or enjoin a state election," the court said in its ruling. "The decision to enjoin an impending election is so serious that the Supreme Court has allowed elections to go forward even in the face of an undisputed constitutional violation."
Recall opponents had backed a move to delay the election until California updates all its old punch-card machines with new devices that scan ballots optically. Six counties will have to use the old method, which was a cause for controversy in counting Florida ballots during the 2000 presidential election.
It's unclear whether those who had asked for a delay will appeal the case to the U.S. Supreme Court, said Daniel Tokaji, one of the attorneys involved. "The court has basically punted on the presented issue: whether use of punch cards violates voter rights," Tokaji said. "We could be facing a repeat of Florida 2000 if it's a close election."
Charles Diamond, an attorney for Ted Costa, one of those backing the recall, said the court ruled properly because the three-judge panel was supposed to determine solely whether an earlier ruling by a district-court judge was erroneous.
Diamond speculated that the U.S. Supreme Court, if asked, would decline to review the case. "There's nothing for the Supreme Court to review," Diamond said. "That issue has been laid to rest."
Now...let's get out and make sure everyone votes you can vote that prick out of office!