{{{{{BREAKING}}}}}} Federal Appeals Court to re-examine Recall Ruling

[Booberdawg]

Will follow with link when available

SAN FRANCISCO, Sept. 16 — A federal appeals court said Tuesday it will consider whether to re-examine its three-judge panel’s postponement of the California recall election. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals asked California election officials and recall proponents to file briefs by Wednesday afternoon on whether they want an 11-judge appellate panel to rehear the case. For now, the election remains on hold, under Monday’s decision by the three-judge panel.

CANDIDATES IN THE recall election said Monday they would continue to run at full speed, even though the Oct. 7 election could now be more than five months away.

Monday’s decision by a three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals delayed the vote because some counties are planning to use punch-card ballots — the same kind used in the contested 2000 presidential election. The judges said the use of the voting machines, admittedly more prone to error than the more modern systems in use elsewhere, would disenfranchise thousands of Californians.

The ruling threw an already chaotic campaign into further turmoil.


http://www.msnbc.com/news/945950.asp?0cv=CB10

[Starpass]

1. This must mean that the rumors that the Supremes won't touch it

are true. The debate today was which way they would go with the appeal: To this court or go directly to the Supremes.

[Booberdawg]

2. I don't know if it means that

Do you? Does this mean that the Republicans chose to file their appeal with the CA court??

I see bulletin coming up ... I'll grab a link asap ...

[Booberdawg]

3. No link yet but said still could go to USSC after this

Will be examined by 11 judges in the 9th circuit court. Very technical. Think I saw the term for this but can't think of it right now. en blanc?? still waiting for the link ..

[HFishbine]

5. Writ

of cerciori?

[djg21]

17. It's "en banc"

"per curiam" means by the court, i.e., authored by no specific judge (who wants to take credit or blame).

[gratuitous]

4. My guess

This means that the Ninth Circuit has been petitioned for an en banc ruling by the full panel, to review the ruling rendered by a panel of three judges. Routine request, considering the circumstances.

[Booberdawg]

6. yup they just now said the court would listen to this en banc

[NNN0LHI]

7. Its like a lawyer asking the jury to be polled after a trial n/t

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

8. That was predictable and is appropriate

Kozinski is a bit of a maverick..it will be interesting to see what he does.

[Booberdawg]

12. Who is Kozinski

He's not in this story

[Booberdawg]

9. Dammit no link yet but they said the court did this on their own???

The parties have till 2:00 (??) tomorrow to take them up on this.

link attached now

[hang a left]

10. Bottom line this will go all the way

to SC. The Big Question? Will they touch it? I don't think so. They would have to clarify their ruling that the 9th circuit cited in its opinion. I don't think they want to revisit 00.

[Jacobin]

11. This is standard operating procedure

It's n the Federal Rules of Appellate procedure. Before you appeal from the appeals court, you ask for a rehearing and in this case an en banc rehearing.

Typical stupid, uninformed idiotic, ignorant, ranting, blathering media that knows nothing and reports everything like some breathless 13 year old valley girl freaking out about her boyfriend's new hair cut.

[Oracle]

13. Here, here...

:kick:

[damnraddem]

14. Those stupid punch-card machines really are a menace.

I used them when I lived in California. I always worried that I might have positioned the card wrong, or not fully punched out some of my votes. And that was long before we all learned about hanging and other chads.

Any use of punch-card ballots today is telling us as voters that we can have archaic and 'eat it,' too.

[Booberdawg]

15. My understanding from some other threads about those punch-card

machines is also that they are predominately in heavier Democratic areas as well (and have a higher error rate of course). The more Republican leaning areas have optical scanners (with a more accurate rate) Thus another slight edge for the Republicans to have the recal vote sooner than later and before the punch card machines are replaced for the March election.

[LynneSin]

16. Costs keep the urban areas with punch-cards

since it costs money to upgrade it and many urban areas (and even some rural areas - my hometown still has punch cards) do not have the funds to update these. A bulk of these areas are democratic

[Booberdawg]

18. I thought there was some law passed and funding provided

and these machines were already scheduled to be replaced by March??

I'll have to go searching now to see where I saw that. In a thread or a news item in the last 2 days ..

[Booberdawg]

19. It's in this same story

Here's a snip from the article in this thread:

"The court did not set a new date for the recall, but backed a suggestion from the American Civil Liberties Union that balloting be held during the March 2 presidential primary. By that time, the six counties, including Los Angeles, will have replaced the machines under a court order stemming from separate litigation."

So it's not all counties in California but just six counties. That's what triggered my thinking about punch-card machines being replaced, although I incorrectly gave it a broader application than appropriate.