Federal appeals court dismisses electronic voting machine lawsuit

[gristy]

San Francisco Chronicle
10/29/03

A federal appeals court has tossed out a lawsuit seeking to ban electronic voting machines that don't print paper records, ruling that no voting method can completely eliminate electoral fraud.

Riverside County voter Susan Marie Weber had sued state and county election officials to ban the ticketless voting machines. She argued that the new voting system in her county did not allow proper auditing or recounting of votes.

But a three-judge panel of the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decided unanimously Tuesday to dismiss Weber's lawsuit.

"We agree that Weber has raised at most a hypothetical concern about the ability to audit and verify election results," Judge Pamela Ann Rymer ruled for the panel. But in dismissing the case, she wrote that "electoral fraud can never be completely eliminated no matter which type of ballot is used."

more

[acmavm]

1. But they are ingoring evidence that this method of tabulating the

votes is the most unreliable and subject to possible fraud of all of them.

[Closer]

2. We're

fucked.

Oh, and California bites as of late.

[Another Bill C.]

3. Weber makes a really good point.

If this ruling could be extrapolated to cover an IRS audit, then the IRS would have to accept a taxpayer's spreadsheet file without supporting receipts. Maybe Weber's on to something.

[mbperrin]

4. Hmmmmmmmmmmm......

Dang! Now I have to learn to use a spreadsheet! (Sure will save a heap o dollars, though!)

Oh, BTW, too bad about the death of democracy and all that. Still, money's money, right?

[Wickerman]

10. er, they don't?

I kinda thought that was risky - only 5 more years before the audit statute expires on that ill=frsaken tax year, only 5 more years. crosses figners...

[candy331]

5. Voter fraud may not can be eliminated

but surely it can be minimized.Isn't that the goal? No lock can keep a thief out so I guess locks are not needed either. Right? In fact it has been said that locks are for the honest person to help keep him that way because a thief does not respect locks.

[DUreader]

6. The fix is in, time to head for the border

RIP US

[gristy]

7. This is just one round

of a 15-round fight, I think. An earlier article said

It will likely be weeks before the court's decision, but Weber has not ruled out an appeal to a larger, en banc panel of the court if the three-member panel affirms the 2002 ruling to toss the lawsuit.

Note that Weber is a very sharp cookie, but is not a lawyer. She did most of the work on this suit herself.

[sendero]

8. that is ....

... the stupidest rationale for a decision I can imagine.

Let's see where that can go:

We can never really be sure anyone is guilty, so why bother with a trial?

A surgeon can never wash all the bacteria off his hands, so why bother washing them at all?

Speed limits can only prevent some accidents, so why have them?

Other things I'd like to say but best not.

[Endangered Specie]

9. May the best hacker win

... the election, that is..

[teryang]

19. Don't trouble the court with logic

...it interferes with politics.

[cosmicdot]

11. Judge Pamela Ann Rymer

Appointed by: President Bush, 1989
http://www.appellate-counsellor.com/profiles/rymer.htm

she wrote that "electoral fraud can never be completely eliminated no matter which type of ballot is used."

does she know something we should know?

how depressing is that!

American Patriot - Susan Marie Weber



http://electionguardians.org/actions.htm

[dusty64]

15. Looks like a reagan/bush

appointee, why am I not surprised. This ruling is based on the fact that ALL methods are riggable so why bother stopping one that is COMPLETELY open to manipulation. This is a crock of shit, I guess we really ARE totally screwed. Revolution will probably be our only hope of getting this Country back, lets hope it isn't violent!

[Sperk]

12. what a lame f#ucking excuse!!!!!

you can at least have a recount with the other methods. Such bullshit...........losing faith in the USA again. :-(

[gristy]

13. Just spoke by phone with an activist lawyer I met in DC on Saturday

He lives near Mpls, which is where I lived up until 2 weeks ago. He spends most of his time on criminal (not civil) cases. I spoke with him for about 15 minutes and am sending him some information on BBV (including the links in this thread). He knows quite a few other activist lawyers, some of whom focus on civil suits. He said he would talk it up with them and get back to me.

Does anyone know if the forum at blackboxvoting.org is up? It's not working for me.

[shance]

14. So Pamela Ryner was appointed by the Bush Administration in 1989

What about the other judges?

[Matilda]

17. I'm curious about that too.

[leesa]

16. Apaper trail can at least TRY to prevent fraud, Ms Republican Judge

[smiley_glad_hands]

18. BBV

This is just more failed logic. Don't forget people, 1 + 2 = 4.

[teryang]

20. I studied the florida election laws on this point

after the 2000 debacle. State law on elections governs even in a presidential race. If state law allows for protests and challenges to vote tallies, those laws are rendered meaningless by encrypted electronic ballots because they cannot be audited. This was well publicized on the Bell.com as a limitation of encrypted ballots. No vote could ever be tested by a candidate.

It is implied therefore, in Florida at least, any voting method without paper ballots available for recounts could be enjoined as a violation of state election laws. In order to have standing one would have to be an eligible candidate eligible and qualified to run in an election. My two cents worth. I don't know what the California laws say.

[The_Casual_Observer]

21. Does anyone believe that some old lady judge

would be technically qualified to make a sensible decision on something like this?
Instead, the ruling was, by definition, made on the basis of the most crass political considerations.

[Kinkistyle]

22. Oh well. Can't totally eliminate something, might as well stop tryin

We'll never be able to completely eliminate disease, might as well close all hospitals. We'll never be able to completely eliminate robberies, might as well stop going after robbers. We'll never be able to eliminate corporate fraud, lets close up the SEC and let corporate crooks do whatever they want... oh wait. :grr:

Oh well. Release the hackers I say. If the courts aren't willing to place failsafes and regulations in the system for to guarantee fairness and accountability, then the public has no choice but to destroy the system. It is the moral thing to do. The hackers and crackers already have some pretty sensitive documentation and intel, which I am sure the talented hackers in other countries such as China, India, Korea, etc.. also have their hands on.

Let loose the hounds of war. :evilfrown:

[dusty64]

23. Kick.

:kick: