Posted on 11/20/2010 9:43:08 AM PST by Free in Texas
A federal judge ruled Friday in favor of Republican Joe Miller to halt the certification of the election results — at least provisionally — in his race against Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski’s write-in campaign to retain her seat.
U.S. District Judge Ralph Beistline granted a temporary injunction to stop election officials from certifying the results of the Senate race, according to The Associated Press.
However, Beistline granted the injunction as long as Miller moves his case to state court instead of federal court by Monday. Beistline reportedly said that state court is in “the best position, at least initially, to apply Alaska law and to determine who won this election.”
The results of the case, which will likely now be determined in state court, will be instrumental in determining the final results of the Senate seat — although a Miller victory is still a long shot.
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
Sec. 15.15.360. Rules for counting ballots.
(a) The election board shall count ballots according to the following rules:
(1) A voter may mark a ballot only by filling in, making "X" marks, diagonal, horizontal, or vertical marks, solid marks, stars, circles, asterisks, checks, or plus signs that are clearly spaced in the oval opposite the name of the candidate, proposition, or question that the voter desires to designate.
(2) A failure to properly mark a ballot as to one or more candidates does not itself invalidate the entire ballot.
(3) If a voter marks fewer names than there are persons to be elected to the office, a vote shall be counted for each candidate properly marked.
(4) If a voter marks more names than there are persons to be elected to the office, the votes for candidates for that office may not be counted.
(5) The mark specified in (1) of this subsection shall be counted only if it is substantially inside the oval provided, or touching the oval so as to indicate clearly that the voter intended the particular oval to be designated.
(6) Improper marks on the ballot may not be counted and do not invalidate marks for candidates properly made.
(7) An erasure or correction invalidates only that section of the ballot in which it appears.
(8) A vote marked for the candidate for President or Vice-President of the United States is considered and counted as a vote for the election of the presidential electors.
(9) Write-in votes are not invalidated by writing in the name of a candidate whose name is printed on the ballot unless the election board determines, on the basis of other evidence, that the ballot was so marked for the purpose of identifying the ballot.
(10) In order to vote for a write-in candidate, the voter must write in the candidate's name in the space provided and fill in the oval opposite the candidate's name in accordance with (1) of this subsection.
(11) A vote for a write-in candidate, other than a write-in vote for governor and lieutenant governor, shall be counted if the oval is filled in for that candidate and if the name, as it appears on the write-in declaration of candidacy, of the candidate or the last name of the candidate is written in the space provided.
(12) If the write-in vote is for governor and lieutenant governor, the vote shall be counted if the oval is filled in and the names, as they appear on the write-in declaration of candidacy, of the candidates for governor and lieutenant governor or the last names of the candidates for governor and lieutenant governor, or the name, as it appears on the write-in declaration of candidacy, of the candidate for governor or the last name of the candidate for governor is written in the space provided.
(b) The rules set out in this section are mandatory and there are no exceptions to them. A ballot may not be counted unless marked in compliance with these rules.
(c) [Repealed, Sec. 24 ch 113 SLA 2003].
If I understand this correctly, the issue is whether or not the state judge will apply the election statutes strictly and disqualify misspelled ballots or go with the voter's supposed intent. As written the statute states that the write-in ballot's spelling of the candidate's name must exactly match the candidate's write-in declaration. Perhaps the fat lady isn't quite finished singing yet.
Darn it, I just searched for duplicate threads before I posted this. Apologies.
The problem is, the state courts have routinely ignored the clear letter of the law so far.
You mean they taught all those indigenous Democrats to spell “Lisa” for nothing?
Fight,Joe,fight them all the way to the Supreme Court if need be.
The entrenched politicians need to be shown the door,and they ought to be glad Americans are not like the French of 1789!
I know, they could’ve been ice-fishing all this time!
I’d love to see Miller boot Murkowski out on her sore-looser sorry butt.
She didn’t go away quietly after losing the GOP primary, he shouldn’t go away quietly either.
Once the state court screws the pooch, it is time to go to Federal Court!
Frank Murkowski ought to have been impeached and removed from office of governor as soon as he tried to appoint his daughter to the Senate.Blatant nepotism is just wrong.America would do better without the several "political families" like the Bushes and Kennedys.I'd like to see it be illegal for both spouses to recieve a government paycheck regardless of which government agency issued that paycheck.and further that no household may receive more than one government paycheck.
I agree. He should fight to the bitter end.
Nepotism and world-class pandering are elitist SOP’s. They know Miller and the TEA Party represent the end of politcal life as practiced by professional pols like Murkowski.
The Federal Judge put the restriction in place in order to prevent the games state courts play. (see FL and later Bush v. Gore) The USSC established that divining intent is not equal protection for all voters.
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.