2014 Feb Redesign Roof

electionLine

2014 Feb Redesign Search

2014 Feb Redesign Print/Email

Print | Email

Nice Social Bookmark

electionlineWeekly — October 22, 2015

Table of Contents

 IV. Legal Update

Colorado: Yuma County District Attorney Brittny Lewton has said her office will not pursue charges against a man who first voted in Colorado and then several days later voted in Kansas. Kansas has filed 10 criminal charges against the voter.

Florida: A grand jury has been called to investigate claims that Eatonville Mayor Anthony Grant rigged an election. Former Mayor Bruce Mount claims that Grant bribed people to vote for him with their absentee ballots.

Georgia: Fayette County and the NAACP have entered mediation in an attempt to settle a voting rights lawsuit dating to 2011. The national, state and county chapters of the NAACP sued the Fayette Board of Commissioners and Board of Education. They allege Fayette's at-large voting method is racially discriminatory and that district voting would be more equitable.

Indiana: A federal judge has barred Indiana from enforcing its new ballot selfie law. According to the Associated Press, U.S. District Judge Sarah Evans Baker issues a preliminary injunction against the state. In her 20-page ruling, Barker invoked U.S. Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis’ 1928 warning that “the greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding.”

Kansas: District Judge Douglas Roth has set a trial date for March 22 in the suit between Local Certified Quality Engineer Beth Clarkson and Sedgwick County. Clarkson is suing the county over how it tabulates ballots and is seeking to determine if there is election fraud in the county or if there is something with the county’s electronic voting machines.

Wisconsin: This week, Federal District Judge Lynn Adelman rejected the American Civil Liberties Union’s lawsuit to expand the types of photo IDs Wisconsin residents are allowed to show at the polls. “To be sure, Wisconsin probably could have included veteran’s ID on the list … without significantly increasing its administrative burden,” Adelman said in his opinion. “However … the state had to draw the line between acceptable and unacceptable forms of ID somewhere.”