 |
 -0 |
 |
|
||||||||
 |
||||||||
 |
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
||||||||
 |
|
Court rules election is on
Unless the U.S. Supreme Court steps in quickly, the decision means Election Day is two weeks away.
The 11-member panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously overturned the Sept. 15 decision of a three-judge panel from the same circuit. The original panel postponed the election because six counties would use outdated punch-card ballots that were the subject of the "hanging chads" battle in the 2000 presidential election in Florida.
The decision clears the way for a possible appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, which could be asked to revisit its Bush v. Gore decision in the 2000 election.
The American Civil Liberties Union, which brought the challenge, said Tuesday it was weighing an appeal to the Supreme Court.
The appeals court reinstated a ruling by a district court judge who originally refused to postpone the election. The judges based their decision on the state's constitution, not any precedent set by Bush v. Gore.
"The district court did not abuse its discretion in concluding that plaintiffs will suffer no hardship that outweighs the stake of the state of California and its citizens in having this election go forward as planned and as required by the California constitution," they said.
Legal scholars had predicted the outcome. A day after the original decision delaying the vote, the court announced it would revisit the case with 11 judges -- a sign the court was not happy with the original decision.
The judges left open the possibility of post-election litigation after the votes are in and counted -- or not.
They said the ACLU is "legitimately concerned that use of the punch card system will deny the right to vote to some voters who must use that system. At this time it is merely a speculative possibility, however, that any such denial will influence the result of the election."
Davis, a Democrat, has been dogged by his handling of the state's ailing economy. Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante is running as a fallback Democratic candidate if voters oust Davis, and Republicans Arnold Schwarzenegger and state Sen. Tom McClintock are among 135 candidates also campaigning for Davis' job.
Some observers thought a delay in the recall vote would have benefited Davis by allowing voter anger over the state's problems to cool, and because many Democrats would be attracted to the polls for the presidential primary if the recall election were moved to March.
"We are ready to beat the recall on Oct. 7," Davis campaign spokesman Peter Ragone said Tuesday. "This recall has already cost enough in terms of public funds and time away from the public's business. It is time to move forward."
Luiz Vizcaino, a spokesman for the Bustamante campaign, said: "We are pleased with the court's decision. It is important to move forward, resolve this election, and get back to work."
Spokesmen for the Schwarzenegger and McClintock campaigns could not immediately be reached for comment.
The 11 judges of the 9th Circuit heard oral arguments in the case Monday.
Lawyers for Secretary of State Kevin Shelley urged the panel to overturn the three-judge panel. They said the California constitution requires recall elections to be held no later than 80 days after enough signatures of registered voters are gathered. They also said the vote should go on because more than 600,000 absentee ballots had been turned in.
The counties whose voting apparatuses prompted the litigation include Los Angeles, Mendocino, Sacramento, San Diego, Santa Clara and Solano. They represent about 40 percent of the
|
|
|
