 |
 -0 |
 |
|
||||||||
 |
||||||||
 |
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
||||||||
 |
|
August 04, 2003 Launching his first legal challenge to the recall election, Gov. Gray Davis will ask the state Supreme Court today to delay the vote until March 2 and let him run as a replacement candidate. "What's happening in California is not just a battle over the governor, it's a battle over the constitution," said Kathleen Sullivan, a Davis lawyer and dean of the Stanford Law School. Sullivan and two other attorneys for the governor on Sunday outlined his plea to the high court. Davis will argue that: • Because foreseeable problems with Oct. 7 balloting will disenfranchise voters, the election should be delayed. Some county election officials say they are likely to use antiquated punch-card systems and consolidate precincts, leaving fewer voting locations. "This election is operating under such duress, such a compressed truncated election schedule, that it cannot be a fair election," said attorney Robin Johansen. Davis' supporters want to delay the election for political advantage. The March 2 date coincides with the Democratic presidential primary, which should draw members of the governor's party to the polls. • Davis should be allowed to compete as a replacement candidate for his own seat. The state constitution prohibits him from doing so. That, his lawyers say, violates federal constitutional protections of political expression because his backers are denied the option to vote for him. With scores, or perhaps hundreds, of candidates, it's possible someone could win with a small plurality. Davis might be the most popular if he could run. "We want the fairest possible election," said attorney Michael Kahn, " ... and we want the preference of the voters to be vindicated." Some legal experts were skeptical Davis will succeed. "No election is glitch free," said Vikram Amar, Hastings Law School constitutional scholar. "The question is how big the glitches are going to be." A state Republican Party lawyer said Davis was trying to buy time. "Delay, that's what it's about," said Charles Bell. "Politically I'm not sure it stands him very well. ... He's basically saying to the voters, 'You're stupid and you need to be protected from the system.'" This will be the first legal move Davis has initiated. It will be the fifth recall case pending before the state's high court. The recall election will present voters with two questions: Whether to remove Davis from office and who should replace him if he is ousted. The governor's plea to the high court will come five days before the filing deadline for candidates seeking to replace him if he is unseated. By week's end, prominent Democrats will have to decide whether to put up another candidate or gamble everything on Davis. Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante set the Oct. 7 election date to give officials the most time allowed for a recall. Election officials usually have much more time to prepare for an election. The balloting comes as some counties are replacing their punch-card voting systems. That chad-laden ballot method received national attention after the 2000 presidential election count in Florida. Davis will argue that election officials here need more time. "Registrars in many counties lack the time and resources to prepare and conduct a fair election," the Davis team warns in a draft of the legal pleadings. "The result is a disparity of voting opportunity that makes Florida's election procedures look almost pristine by comparison." Daniel Lowenstein, a UCLA law professor, said the merits of the plea depend on the severity of the problems. "There is a constitutional right to vote, but that doesn't mean that anything that happens that might make it a little bit more inconvenient to vote is an infringement on that right," he said.
"You can't say in order for an election to be held, it has to be held
|
|
|
