Posted on 11/01/2004 5:14:14 PM PST by RightFighter
This cause originated upon the filing of a complaint for a writ of mandamus. Upon consideration of relators’ motion for an emergency peremptory writ of mandamus,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that relators’ motion be, and hereby is, granted, and that a writ of mandamus be, and hereby is, granted to compel respondent Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell to reissue and enforce his October 26, 2004 Directive 2004-45 to all eighty-eight counties insofar as it permits, in accordance with R.C. 3505.21 and 3506.13, one duly designated challenger per precinct and, after the polls close, one duly designated witness per precinct, no matter how many precincts vote at a single location.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a writ of mandamus be, and hereby is, granted to compel respondent Franklin County Board of Elections and the remaining eighty-seven county boards of elections to comply with this directive. This order is based solely on this court’s interpretation of state statutes.
PFEIFER, LUNDBERG STRATTON, O'CONNOR and O'DONNELL, JJ., concur.
RESNICK, ACTING C.J., and F.E. SWEENEY, J., dissent. GORMAN, J, dissents.
ROBERT H. GORMAN, J., of the First Appellate District, sitting for MOYER, C.J.
(Excerpt) Read more at sconet.state.oh.us ...
I saw your pings to me
and attempted to reply.
Petronski is right: 2 rulings.
I don't know, but it's been fixed now.
The Ohio Supreme Court issued a writ of mandamus (forcing the OhioSecState to permit the observers, as I read it). I don't know who brought that action.
The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals overturned that Clintonite appointee who had tried to bar the observers from polling places.
The second ruling is more important because Federal law will trump, under the supremacy clause. But they're both important because they represent a dual, contemporaneous repudiation of the Democrat party's attack on the plain language of the statute.
That is all.
Allison is from WFXT Boston and has been "flirting" with the national affiliate for some time. All in all she's still a Kerry/Kennedy shill!
GLENN has been gone
The Federal Appeals Court was dealing with the Federal judge who tried to intervene in the States Business....
A hugh victory for the GOP, Ohio will go Bush now.
She does national on holiday weekends, when the campaign is in N.H., or some Dim Wit is in Hyannis or Edgartown. Wherever there's a kerry/ Kennedy, Allison's there!
Judge Dlott-Chesley you mean. Her husband is a high-priced lawyer in Cincinnati and their house was the stopping grounds for Billy Bob everytime he wanted to raise some money locally.
Thanks!
LOL - wonder how many walls in that $11 MIL house of hers she (judge) has kicked in. Doncha' love it?
Ahhh,...thanks!! I didn't know that. I had noticed her on a few times but never paid any attention to the dates/time of year! Makes sense now though,... thanks!
Anyone else get the feeling that Mr. McAuliffe has toked on a few fat ones??? I'm not talking drugs. Well, eventually I'm sure he started sucking on the crack pipe,....but. LMAO!!!
Wow!!! I'm talking to myself now???? KILLER!!!
There were two things going on. First, Ken Blackwell, the Secretary of State, wussed out, and said that there could be only one challenger per polling place. Jim Petro, the AG, disagreed, and effectively filed suit compelling Blackwell to execute his authority (that's what a writ of mandamus does) to authorize one challenger per precinct.
BUT, that only addressed the correct interpretation of state law. The Federal judges had issued orders saying no challengers at all. The thing is that even if the federal judges eventually were overturned by the 6th Circuit (which is what happened tonight), all that would have done was lifted the two federal orders. But Blackwell's order still would have stood absent this Order by the Ohio Supreme Court.
The Ohio Supreme Court case said that challengers must be permitted under state law, and that the SOS had to instruct boards of election to that effect.
The 6th Circuit said that the Ohio law did not violate federal law.
Hope that helps. So, the Ohio Supreme Court ordered Blackwell to permit challenges, but expressly stated that its order only interpreted state law. In effect, the Court was acknowledging that the federal court still had authority to determine whether challengers would be permitted under federal law.
I must be missing some of the significance of this ruling. Obviously this is GREAT news for Ohio and the integrity of its electoral votes -- which of course contributes to the election since Ohio is a major swing state. But aren't there similar issues in the other states (including battleground states)? Do they somehow benefit from this ruling (by setting legal precedent or whatever)? Or are we just celebrating Ohio?
So, the Ohio supremes, now that the Federal Appeals Court has handed authority back to them, have instructed Blackwell to go back to allowing one challenger per precinct, instead of one per polling place.
This is a big advantage for the Republicans, who planned for this. The Democrats only planned for one per polling place.
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.