Colorado: Aspen files to appeal ballot-images ruling | AspenTimes.com

The city of Aspen has officially filed a motion to appeal a recent state Court of Appeals ruling that favored political activist Marilyn Marks’ lawsuit challenging the city’s denial of her request to view ballot images from the 2009 mayor’s race. According to the city, the Court of Appeals erred when it held that the Colorado Constitution does not protect the secrecy of ballots. The city’s filing of a “writ of certiorari” to the state Supreme Court does not mean the higher court will consider the appeal.

The motion carries Wednesday’s date, beating the Monday deadline to appeal the ruling by five calendar days. City Attorney John Worcester and Special Counsel James R. True are listed as the attorneys for the petitioner, the city of Aspen and City Clerk Kathryn Koch.

Colorado: Aspen election commissioner wants outside opinion | AspenTimes.com

A member of the Aspen Election Commission said he is seeking a “second opinion” from an outside attorney on whether the commission should approve two public-records requests to inspect paper ballots cast in May’s municipal election. During Wednesday’s commission meeting, member Ward Hauenstein asked City Attorney John Worcester for his legal opinions on the matter, but noted that he also has sought independent counsel. Hauenstein said he likely will ask the Aspen City Council to pay for the outside legal fees at an upcoming meeting.

In his capacity as city attorney, Worcester also provides legal advice to city boards and commissions, such as the Election Commission. But he also is representing the city in its battle against political activist Marilyn Marks’ lawsuit, which stems from the city clerk’s denial of her request to examine ballot images from the 2009 mayor’s race.

New York: Westchester voting machines seized; many ballots uncounted in several legislative races | LoHud.com

Now it’s up to the lawyers. Voting machines throughout Westchester County have been impounded by a state Supreme Court justice so ballots won’t be counted until next week, election officials said Wednesday. And in some county legislative races, it’s still unclear who is leading because the county Board of Elections hasn’t posted results from all the voting districts.

The machines and ballots, which include 3,245 affidavits, are under “lockdown” and therefore cannot be tallied, said Reginald LaFayette, Democratic election commissioner. “Until we all get it sorted out, we’re not giving out any information,” he said Wednesday.

New York: Control of Nassau legislature undetermined | newsday.com

Which party will control the Nassau County Legislature next year may not be known before early December. With all precincts reporting, Republicans have an 11-8 majority in the legislature, holding slim leads in the 14th and 18th districts. Both races, however, are heading to a paper recount that could take several weeks to conclude, both sides said.

Wednesday, Democratic Party chairman Jay Jacobs and Republican chairman Joe Mondello, as they do every year, filed an order to show cause in State Supreme Court compelling the Board of Elections to begin counting all paper ballots. A court date is set for Nov. 16. Mondello spokesman Anthony Santino said the recount would begin after the Nov. 15 deadline to receive all outstanding absentee ballots. Ballots must be postmarked by Nov. 7.

Virginia: How A Recount Works in Virginia Politics | fredericksburg.patch.com

With only 226 votes between unofficial winner Bryce Reeves and incumbent senator Edd Houck, a recount is almost guaranteed. But how does it work? If Edd Houck is going to request a recount of the unofficial 226-vote loss to Republican Bryce Reeves, he must do so within 10 days from the day the State Board of Elections certifies the results of the 17th District Senate race. Power in the state senate hinges on this race. If Reeves wins, there would be a 20-20 tie in the Senate, and Lt. Gov. Bill Boiling, a Republican, would cast the tie-breaking votes. If Houck wins, Democrats retain a majority.

Typically, the results are certified the day following Election Day. Any candidate can request a recount if he or she loses by 1-percent or less of the total votes. Unofficial stats show Houck lost to Reeves by a slim margin. The latest results, posted shortly after 3 p.m., from the Virginia State Board of Elections shows Reeves with a lead over Houck of 22,608 to 22,382. The 226 vote margin is still less than 1-percent of the total votes cast in the race.

Alabama: D.C. Circuit To Hear Voting Rights Act Case In January | The Blog of Legal Times

Lawyers for an Alabama county that is challenging a controversial section of the Voting Rights Act have asked a federal appeals court in Washington to strike down a judge’s ruling that upheld the constitutionality of the law. Judge John Bates of U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia in September ruled for the Justice Department in its defense of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. The section requires some states and localities to get permission before implementing election-related changes.

Section 5, according to the Justice Department, was set up to ensure that changes do not harm minority voting rights. Congress extended the Voting Rights Act in 2006 another 25 years. Shelby County, Ala., sued the Justice Department last year.

Georgia: State seeks to strike down Voting Rights Act  | ajc.com

The state of Georgia wants three federal judges in Washington to declare a portion of the Voting Rights Act unconstitutional. Georgia filed suit earlier this month asking that the court approve Republican-backed plans to redraw the state’s legislative and congressional districts. But in that filing, the state asks that if the court rejects its redistricting plans, that it also rule the law that requires that approval to be unconstitutional.

Georgia is one of nine states that must get any change in election law, including district maps, pre-approved by either the Justice Department or the federal court in Washington. That preclearance is required by Section V of the Voting Rights Act, the landmark 1964 law passed in the wake of Jim Crow and voting laws aimed at limiting the ability of African-Americans to vote.

“The state of Georgia and its voters are being subjected to the continued extraordinary intrusion into its constitutional sovereignty through Section 5 and its outdated preclearance formula based upon discriminatory conditions that existed more than 47 years ago but have long since been remedied,” the state says in its filing.

South Carolina: Suit may stop presidential primary | AP/Boston.com

South Carolina lacks the authority to conduct a 2012 presidential primary, according to a lawsuit filed by four counties at the state Supreme Court. The counties, in a case filed Monday, argue a 2008 primary law doesn’t apply to running a 2012 primary. They argue the state Election Commission lacks the authority to conduct the primary and enter a contract with the state Republican Party to pay for it. And they say the commission can’t require counties to cover expenses for the GOP primary.

The counties said they “are on the precipice of having to expend precious public funds to conduct what is wholly a private function on behalf of a private political party.” The lawsuit names the state Election Commission and the state Republican and Democratic parties.

Texas: Court throws out judgment against voting machines | Associated Press

The Supreme Court has thrown out a ruling that could have halted the use of a certain electronic voting machine in Texas. The high court without comment vacated a ruling against Dallas County, Texas. That county was sued by the Texas Democratic Party over the use of iVotronic machines.

Read the Court Orders (PDF)

They allow people to vote straight-party tickets, but if the voter subsequently touches any of the candidates in that party on the screen, their vote for that person is rescinded.

National: Will the Roberts Court Kill the Voting Rights Act? | ACS

Speaking before a joint session of Congress on March 15, 1965, LBJ urged support for the Voting Rights Act (VRA). He implored all members to get behind it or risk being on the wrong side of history. He asserted that “Experience has clearly shown that the existing process of law cannot overcome systematic and ingenious discrimination. No law…can ensure the right to vote when local officials are determined to deny it.”

That was then, and Justice Clarence Thomas (among others) and his assertion that the time for the Voting Rights Act has indeed come and gone, is now. But before we throw dirt on the VRA once and for all, a bit of context is in order.

With the current redistricting cycle full steam ahead, the VRA becomes controlling  when plaintiffs seek to challenge newly drawn maps of legislative districts with sections (2) and (5) being invoked. Section 2 prohibits any “voting qualification or prerequisite to voting, or standard, practice or procedure” being imposed or applied to any State or political subdivision” that would “deny or abridge the right of any citizen of the United States to vote on account of race or color” while Section (5) requires a DOJ or US District Court of DC “pre-clearance” when seeking to administer any voting qualification, procedure, standard, practice or procedure “different from that in force or effect November 1, 1964.”

Oklahoma: Cherokee Elections Continue in Tribal Court | Indian Country Today

The June 25 election for Cherokee Nation Chief between incumbent Chad “Corntassel” Smith and challenger Bill John Baker is now heading into its second week, with a storyline that has seen the numbers of unofficial, certified and recounted votes change at least three times. At press time, this election has also seen injunctions and appeals filed in the Cherokee Nation Supreme Court by both sides.

Smith was first elected to the office of Chief in 1999 and has served three previous terms. His opponent, Baker, is a three-term member of the Cherokee Nation tribal council. The Cherokee Nation has approximately 300,000 members, whose jurisdiction encompasses 14 counties in eastern Oklahoma.

Unofficial results for this election on June 26 showed Baker in the lead with 11 votes out of 14,000 cast. Upon certification of the votes by the Cherokee Nation Election Commission, Smith was officially the winner by 7 votes—7,609 for Smith and 7,602 for Baker.

Wisconsin: Supreme Court recount cost $520,000-plus, survey shows | madison.com

The recent recount in the Wisconsin Supreme Court race between Justice David Prosser and challenger JoAnne Kloppenburg cost counties more than $500,000, an Associated Press survey found.

The AP queried election officials in all 72 counties, asking for their best cost estimates. Seventy counties reported spending a total of nearly $520,500. The actual cost was likely higher because two counties and the state didn’t provide estimates.

Waukesha County appears to have spent the most. It estimated its cost at $129,000, with more than a third of that going to pay a retired judge who oversaw the recount after the embattled county clerk recused herself.

Bangladesh: Prime Minister asks: Hartal [Strike] against Bangladesh government or court? | The Daily Star

Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina yesterday castigated the main opposition BNP for calling a countrywide dawn-to-dusk hartal on Sunday on the caretaker government issue.

“Has BNP called for the hartal against the government or the court that declared the caretaker government system illegal?” she questioned when a delegation of Nitol-Niloy and IPSSL groups called on her at her office in the afternoon.

Editorials: John Tanner: Why voter ID won’t fly in Texas | statesman.com

It has started again. Proponents of voter ID requirements are preparing another push, confident that the law is on their side. In fact, they are backing into a buzz saw.

On the surface, the pro-ID group has reason to be complacent. It won in the Supreme Court in Indiana, which had the most restrictive ID requirement in the nation, and also in Georgia. Those states, however, are a world away from Texas.