Absentee voters' suit filed

ZWIRE ^ | 10/5/02 | Dave Sommers

[Tumbleweed_Connection]

A hearing has been set for Monday in U.S. District Court to hear arguments from Republican attorneys who filed a lawsuit yesterday on behalf of two Mercer County voters who have already cast absentee ballots for U.S. Senate but are worried their votes will now be nullified.

Maj. Kevin Reilly, 37, of Hamilton, an army doctor currently stationed in Hawaii, and Daniel Patrick O'Connell, aPrinceton man visiting Paris, would both be disenfranchised if the New Jersey Supreme Court's order to print new ballots stands, Republicans will argue.

Reilly, a married father of two, said he realized his vote and possibly others would be jeopardized as soon as he heard of the New Jersey Supreme Court's decision.

"It's not a matter of printing ballots. My vote has already been sent out," said Reilly, a surgeon who has been on active duty since 1998.

"I don't care which side wins. It's the right of the voters that are in jeopardy," said Reilly.

"New ballots would incur additional risk. Think of the people out on submarines or flying around in Afghanistan who wouldn't get ballots on time," he added.

Bill Baroni, attorney for the Forrester campaign, said the state Supreme Court's decision allowing Democrats to swap Frank Lautenberg for Bob Torricelli violates the Voting Rights Act, among other infractions.

More than 106 military ballots have already been mailed with Torricelli's name on the ballot and each of those could have already been sent back, Baroni said.

U.S. District Judge Garrett Brown is expected to hear arguments at 11:30 a.m., said Baroni.

Republicans have asked the judge to "stay" the state Supreme Court's decision and to send out the original ballots immediately.

A native of Yardville, Reilly said he and his wife, Ann Marie returned their ballots to New Jersey on Tuesday by certified mail, just hours after voting legally began at midnight Sept. 30, Hawaii time.

Later that day, Reilly said he was reading ultrasounds at the Tripler Army Medical Center in Honolulu when his buddy told him of the Jersey Supreme Court's decision.

On Tuesday night, he tried to contact the New Jersey Supreme Court but could not get through. Instead, he contacted his congressman, Rep. Chris Smith who apparently forwarded the message to the GOP.

Torricelli, citing low poll numbers, dropped from the U.S. Senate race on Monday well past the 51 day replacement deadlinewhen Democratic Party operatives told him he could not win.

Republicans want the federal court to validate the absentee ballots already sent out with Torricelli's name, and to overturn the decision by the state Supreme Court's ruling that Lautenberg could be a replacement.

Baroni said he hopes Brown rules quickly so other New Jersey absentee voters do not have their ballots nullified.

[Tumbleweed_Connection]

WIPE THE SMILE OFF OF THIS MAN’S FACE.
SUPPORT FREE REPUBLIC

Donate here by secure server

Or mail checks to
FreeRepublic , LLC
PO BOX 9771
FRESNO, CA 93794

[marajade]

Does this mean the USSC would more than likely wait until this is over?

[Tumbleweed_Connection]

No.

[randita]

What to do with the votes already legally cast? A problem the NJSC obviously didn't give a whit about.

Can't throw 'em out because they were legally cast votes--against the law to nullify a legally cast vote.

Can't have voter re-vote-people aren't allowed to vote twice (except in Chicago and Palm Beach, Broward and Miami-Dade).

What a pesky problem.

[Brytani]

These suits shouldn't be taken into consideration by the USSC since they are filed in a federal court and no arguments have been made.

The USSC can however look at see if the NJSC ruling goes against set federal election law pertaining to absentee ballots in general.

I honestly thought the USSC would have made some sort of announcement by now. The longer they wait, the worse it looks IMO for the GOP suit. At least for now.

[Rockyrich]

And all those lamos on the New Jersey Saprono Court knew this and didn't give a rats rear end IF anyone would be disenfranchised. They care more about maintaining power for the `RATS than about the rule of law or the rights of NJ citizens.

[Brytani]

The returned ballots do raise the most interesting problem in this entire mess and is probably what will eventually kill the democrats efforts in all of this.

The dems have put themselves in a major hole with this mess. In Florida during election 2000 they fought to keep illegally cast votes (felons) counted, they also fought to count basically all ballots that were not 100% clear as votes for Al Gore. Now they will have to fight to throw out legally cast, clearly marked ballots of our military.

The GOP needs to hammer this point over and over again until the sheeple realize what the Dems are actually doing.

[John Jorsett]

Torricelli, citing low poll numbers, dropped from the U.S. Senate race on Monday well past the 51 day replacement deadlinewhen Democratic Party operatives told him he could not win.

Probably more like "this resignation is going to have either your signature or your brains on it."

[John Jorsett]

I honestly thought the USSC would have made some sort of announcement by now. The longer they wait, the worse it looks IMO for the GOP suit. At least for now.

I saw another poster come to exactly the opposite conclusion. In truth, there's no way of knowing. The one sign that might carry some weight is if the court members show up this weekend. That probably means they're planning to take the case. (Credit for this observation goes to Freeper Congressman BillyBob)

[Brytani]

I was part of Congressmanbillybobs thread on that very point last night. I'm of two thought on it (though I admit, he has much more experience then I do). This is the busiest weekend for the USSC, the weekend before it's opening Monday. I don't know how unusual it would be for the court to work this particular weekend. If it was any other, I'd 100% agree.

As with everything else, we will not know how the USSC goes until they finally come out and say or do something. It is good news however Souter didn't immediately through out the request.

[Verginius Rufus]

They could record them as a vote for the candidate selected...but if the choice was Torricelli it should not be counted as a vote for Lautenberg.

[Wild Irish Rogue]

Sean Hannity had an interesting angle on this election. He said that since the Primary-the Dems in NJ, have known who their opposition candidate was, have done research, prepared ads,talking points, etc. But, Forrester is at the disadvantage of just now, 4 weeks before the election, of finding out who is opposition is. If this stands, this will enable the Dems in NJ, to repeat this scenario every election cycle- putting in a substitute hitter at the last minute, to throw off the Republicans.

[supercat]

They could record them as a vote for the candidate selected...but if the choice was Torricelli it should not be counted as a vote for Lautenberg.

Yes, but what if the voter might have wanted to vote for Lautenberg had he been aware that he was going to be on the ballot? No matter how you slice it, it's neither fair nor legal to give different voters in a race ballots with different names on them.

[Tumbleweed_Connection]

I honestly thought the USSC would have made some sort of announcement by now. The longer they wait, the worse it looks IMO for the GOP suit. At least for now.

SCOTUS doesn't reconvene until Monday.

[XBob]

It's the same as the Florida Ruling - according to the US constitution - NO EXPOST FACTO Laws - you can't change the law after the fact.