Posted on 10/17/2008 8:55:28 AM PDT by Danae
Edited on 10/17/2008 12:24:59 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
The U.S. Supreme Court rules with Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner, granting her a stay to a temporary restraining order from a federal appeals court that ordered her to provide a system for implementing voter fraud prevention methods.
The U.S. Supreme Court agreed with Democratic Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner, granting her a stay on Friday to a decision from a lower court that ordered her to provide a system for implementing voter fraud prevention methods.
The decision by the full court repudiates the lower court's ruling siding with the Ohio Republican Party and ordering Brunner to verify records of about 200,000 of 666,000 new voters this year whose driver's license and Social Security records don't match information in other government databases.
In an unsigned order, the high court ruled that it could not say whether Ohio was properly enforcing the Help America Vote Act. However, it said the Ohio GOP doesn't have the standing to file the suit.
"They didn't deal with the merits of the case," said Ohio GOP Chairman Bob Bennett. "What they dealt with was a technicality on whether we had standing or not to bring the action."
I hope so.
Here is the text:
JENNIFER BRUNNER, OHIO SECRETARY OF STATE v. OHIO REPUBLICAN PARTY ET AL. ON APPLICATION FOR STAY [October 17, 2008]
PER CURIAM.
On October 9, 2008, the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio entered a temporary re-straining order (TRO) directing Jennifer Brunner, theOhio Secretary of State, to update Ohio’s Statewide VoterRegistration Database (SWVRD) to comply with Section303 of the Help America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA), 116 Stat. 1708, 42 U. S. C. §15483(a)(5)(B)(i).* The United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied the Secretary’s motion to vacate the TRO. The Secretary has filed an application to stay the TRO with JUSTICE STEVENS as Circuit Justice for the Sixth Circuit, and he has referred the matter to the Court. The Secretary argues both that the District Court had no jurisdiction to enter the TRO and that its ruling on the merits was erro-neous. We express no opinion on the question whether HAVA is being properly implemented. Respondents,however, are not sufficiently likely to prevail on the question whether Congress has authorized the District Court to enforce Section 303 in an action brought by a private litigant to justify the issuance of a TRO. See Gonzaga Univ. v. Doe, 536 U. S. 273, 283 (2002); Alexander v. Sandoval, 532 U. S. 275, 286 (2001). We therefore grant the application for a stay and vacate the TRO.
I don't want to understand this ruling wrong. But rather than granting her a two week extension, they ruled the Ohio GOP had no standing, which would vacate the 6th Circuit and lower court rulings and require the entire case to refiled by a participant with standing?
If this is the case, this ruling allows the Ohio SOS to do as she pleases, and go ahead and permanently separate the early suspect ballots from their envelopes forever destroying evidence of fraud since the order to comply with HAVA has been vacated?
I think everyone should go to the polls and show their ID’s regardless. Gum up the works. Make the the workers look at ID’s.
Tell them, “I am showing you my ID to prove that I am who I say I am. Are you accepting my ID?”
They didn’t rule on the merits. They ruled on standing is what is being reported.
Who can legitimately sue about fraudulent ballots?
Effectively, yes - technically, no. The technicality is that the courts below have to render a ruling that the Ohio GOP lacks standing to sue for failure to comply with the provisions of 42 USC 15483.
The relevant sections of "federal assistance to states for conducting fair elections" are to be enforced by civil suits brought by the Attorney General.
42 USC 1551 - Actions by the Attorney General for declaratory and injunctive relief
The Attorney General may bring a civil action against any State or jurisdiction in an appropriate United States District Court for such declaratory and injunctive relief (including a temporary restraining order, a permanent or temporary injunction, or other order) as may be necessary to carry out the uniform and nondiscriminatory election technology and administration requirements under sections 15481, 15482, and 15483 of this title.
As I read it it is not just that the GOP has no standing, but no private individual would have standing. The only standing to enforce this (under the act) is the US Attorney General - and where has he been?
Of course a slightly broader view would view this as a due process and equal protection suit by an injured party. But Scalia, it turns out, despises common law arguments, even though the common law is the basis of US law for the most part, and tries to go on strict construction of statutes alone.
We are required to show ID in Arizona as of 2004. Every election, the Dems raise he!! to try and get the ID check banished by claiming “disenfranchisement.” What about MY disenfranchisement?
Like I said - so where is the Attorney General? Oh I forgot - he is a Bush appointee.
Yes, that is how I read it.
I don't think the issue with the mail-in ballots is the same as the issue of the failure of the Ohio Secretary of state to produce a mismatch list as required by federal election law. The case being discussed in this thread is about the failure to produce the federally mandated mismatch lists to the County election officials.
What was the breakdown by Justices? Was this another 5-4 lib decision?
Do we even know?
It was per curiam - so there will be no breakdown.
But the breach here is failure of a Secretary of State to comply with a specific bureaucratic scheme mandated by the feds. As if the feds have the corner on methods to insure that only eligible votes cast ballots, and then, each voter casts only one ballot.
Equal rights are violated or diluted on failure to obtain the end result, not on failure to implement somebody's pet idea of what the bureaucratic scheme has to look like.
Democrats aren’t stupid, just socialists. And they are willing to cheat in any way possible to win the Whitehouse and Congress.
After the 2000 Florida Recount Debacle, it should have been obvious to any sane person that the Democrats would go to any length to “find” the votes needed to win. Why he Republicans have chosen to sit on their hands for 8 years mystifies me.
We are about to enter the black midnight of a socialist America.
Ah yes! Let's say it IS TIME, then what?
The false FR bravado is sad. We're gonna do what? Type in ALL CAPS?
No. We'll just watch it on tv and "pop some more popcorn."
Just like Waco.
Sorry....but....
I’ve had freedom for my whole life now. I am not about to try living without freedom at this stage of the game.
If the fascists/socialists cheat their way into the White House, we, the people, will just have to change things. And we will.
If this doesn’t motivate Hillary-Dems to be PUMA’s for McCain/Palin in Ohio (and Pennsylvania) I don’t know what will.
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.