Posted on 11/16/2019 11:03:41 AM PST by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
A federal court in Tallahassee struck down a Florida law that listed the governor’s party first on all ballots, which Democrats argued gave Republicans a significant advantage in a state where the two biggest races in 2018 were both within 0.4 percentage points.
In his ruling, District Court Judge Mark Walker issued a permanent injunction against the law, stating it violates both the First and 14th amendments of the Constitution.
“Florida’s ballot order statute is not neutral; instead, it affects Plaintiffs’ rights in a politically discriminatory way,” Walker wrote. “… It is difficult to imagine what other purpose it could possibly serve than as a thumb on the scale in favor of the party in power.”
The plaintiffs, which included the Democratic National Committee and its campaign committees, cited research showing the statistical advantage of being listed first was estimated to be as high as 5.4 percentage points when Republican Party candidates are listed first and 3.92 points when Democrats are on top.
The 2018 U.S. Senate race in which then-Gov. Rick Scott, a Republican, defeated former Democratic U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson was decided by 0.13 points. The governor’s race won by Republican Ron DeSantis over Democrat Andrew Gillum was decided by 0.4 points. Scott won his two races for governor by less than 1.2 points each.
While 3 to 5 points wasn’t “in and of itself a large proportion of the total vote, it is often a decisive proportion in terms of the spread between the candidates in a Florida election,” Walker ruled.
Walker concluded voters could also lose confidence in the integrity of Florida’s election system from knowing the order of candidates’ names was determined on a partisan basis.
(Excerpt) Read more at orlandosentinel.com ...
Does this judge support the prosecution of voter fraud?
Obama - who else but an Obama judge would involve the court in blatantly political decisions at this level. I’m appalled at the level of corruption of the mind and the law his appointees have have carried with them..
This should have been done in the state court but the socialist, corrupt party know they would lose since the Supreme court of the state is a conservative w=one and they would lose
Why doesn’t the GOP fight like this?
You know, people often ask that question.....
How come Myth doesn't have any balls?
Why is Mitch such a Turtle?
How come McCain only fights against Republicans?
Why is Cantor such a spineless weasel?
Oh, Trump shouldn't say mean things and fight people on Twitter.
The electorate clamors for a fighter, but rewards the nutless among us.
2010 saw the largest gathering of Conservatives and swept the Tea Party into Congress.....where they diddled along and sold us out - albeit at a slower pace than the socialists. The sent a multitude of worthless bills they knew would never get signed.
The moment Trump was inaugurated was the last time any half decent bill made it to the White House.
We fight and wind up with the same political class of losers. Regan and Trump are anomalies......and still - He shouldn't say mean things about the Soviets. He shouldn't say mean things on Twitter......
Not a big deal...IMHO
Someone has to be first. Why are the rats first?
“This should have been done in the state court but...”
This is when the GOP needs strategic thinking and tactical action. Since the demokraps made this a federal issue ... and it went against the GOP, the GOP needs to file suits in all blue** states where demokraps are listed first on every ballot. Of course the GOP should lose those suits at district court b/c the demokrap federal judge will decide against them. But it will eventually make it to the super-legislature US Supreme Court, and whatever comes out there will apply to states where one party is in control.
There are other issues the GOP would follow a similar strategy. The demokraps are short sighted, and you have to box them in. But hope is not lost because of Trump who likes to fight. It is spilling over to some other GOP members, like some of the House GOP who sit on Schiff’s secret impeachment hoax committee. Also, when Senator Turtle took the reins from Harry “Black Eye” Reid, he used the “no filibuster rule” against the howling demokraps for Trump’s judicial appointees. None of this happened during W’s tenure.
** - really communist red belongs to the demokraps by history and tradition, but that’s for another time.
How about a law that only provides the names of the candidates only and not the party?
That would really shake things up.
McConnell and Graham need to get Trump’s judicial appointments confirmed ASAP.
The previous occupant of the White House. The bias that these Leftist judges show is getting unbearable.
Trump
Warren
It seems Trump would still be listed first
Are the Democrats going to raise the same fight in New York, on principle?
(Heh. "Principle." That word's not in the Progressive glossary.)
We may have the “uneducated” vote, but they clearly have the illiterate vote.
The idea that the US Constitution controls the order of candidates on a state election ballot is insane.
What does it mean to be a “Republican”? The Uniparty always looks after its own.
This seems odd to me. Where I vote we go in the door and report to the official at the desk. She asks:”Democrat or Republican?” They give us a stylus and brings up the form on the computer for the party of choice. If you answer both, you will get a combined form. They also check the voter rolls for your name/address. There are print outs kept in the courthouse someplace.
Freedom comes before Socialist.
It probably isn't, but elections are a state function, unless they try to change a constitution requirement for the office. I hope the State fights this, if the need to be addressed it should be the state supreme court. This is an over reach by a federal court.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.