PDA

View Full Version : Judge Napolitano rules on Alaska Senate Race: Mispelled ballots should count




Knightskye
11-10-2010, 05:05 PM
Judge Napolitano was on Cavuto's show about two hours ago, and they were talking about the write-in ballots. Even if it was spelled "Mercowskee," it would count, because it was the intent of the voter to vote for Murkowski. And even if the ballot said "Lisa M.," it would count, because Lisa Murkowski is probably the only registered write-in candidate with those initials.

Napolitano also noted that he wants Miller to win.

:rolleyes:

Noob
11-10-2010, 05:09 PM
How many Write-ins also share the name Lisa and M in their last name? Would those be counted for Murkowski or the real person that is also runing as a Write-in?

Jeremy
11-10-2010, 05:10 PM
Sounds like he doesn't know Alaskan election law or that there are two Lisa Ms.

Promontorium
11-10-2010, 05:10 PM
lol @ "Judge Napalitano rules".

jabf2006
11-10-2010, 05:16 PM
Sounds like he doesn't know Alaskan election law or that there are two Lisa Ms.

Sounds like he doesn't know there are two Lisa Ms.

Intent matters in law, despite how the law maybe written. If an individual intended to vote for Murkowski, and misspelled her name, and the law disallowed that ballot, it would infringe on the voter's rights.

If there is apparent intent to vote for Murkowski within the balance of probabilities, the ballots should count.

ChaosControl
11-10-2010, 05:18 PM
I agree with the Judge.

Noob
11-10-2010, 05:22 PM
Well they even bother to report the votes for all the other write-ins besides Murkowski? I haven't even seen any reports of votes for other write-ins yet. It is reasonable to believe that some of them have voted for them selfs, and if those votes are NOT counted than it shows voter fraud.

oyarde
11-10-2010, 05:36 PM
I agree with the Judge.

Normally I would agree , but not here , they need to follow Alaska law . I have heard that there is more than one Lisa M as a write in , if that is true , the intent for Murkowski would have to be very clear .

RSLudlum
11-10-2010, 05:47 PM
Glad to hear that my misspelling of Smedley Butler as a write-in for Adjutant General last week should count. ;)

RileyE104
11-10-2010, 05:49 PM
lol @ "Judge Napalitano rules".

lol @ the OP misspelling the word misspelled in the title of a thread talking about allowing misspelled write-ins to count... :D

libertythor
11-10-2010, 05:55 PM
Either way, the voter also has a responsibility to cast a competent vote and to follow the instructions. This will boil down to an interpretation of Alaska law.

A voter has the right to spoil his or her ballot if a mistake is made. During the primary elections my hand slipped that made a stray mark on my ballot. The poll workers marked the ballot as "spoiled" and issued me a new one. Also, dyslexic voters can ask for help.

tpreitzel
11-10-2010, 05:56 PM
I would agree with Napolitano if the Alaskan law were written differently. Original intent should be the basis for such decisions.

JoshLowry
11-10-2010, 06:01 PM
Since when do we agree to obey bad laws?

I think the intent of the voter should be taken into consideration.

nate895
11-10-2010, 06:02 PM
Either way, the voter also has a responsibility to cast a competent vote and to follow the instructions. This will boil down to an interpretation of Alaska law.

A voter has the right to spoil his or her ballot if a mistake is made. During the primary elections my hand slipped that made a stray mark on my ballot. The poll workers marked the ballot as "spoiled" and issued me a new one. Also, dyslexic voters can ask for help.

Votes should not be counted that display the voter was obviously ignorant in casting their vote. It isn't as if Murkowski's name isn't proliferated enough to the point that you could be ignorant of how to spell her name because you have never seen it before. A reasonable voter with common knowledge would be able to spell Murkowski's name correctly. I would agree with the Judge if Murkowski was running for office in 19th century Kentucky, where a reasonable voter might have never seen her name spelled correctly, and therefore it would be an unreasonable burden to demand that all write-in votes be spelled correctly.

cswake
11-10-2010, 06:04 PM
The Judge is absolutely wrong, and is probably speaking from his experience with New Jersey statutes. In regards to how the name is counted, it has to be either Murkowski's last name or what she submitted in her write-in registration - that's it. "A ballot may not be counted unless marked in compliance with these rules." The law saw nothing about misspelled or abbreviated names, or anything about intent when writing the name. It explicitly says (with relevant sections quoted):

http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/akstatutes/15/15.15./15.15.360.


(a) The election board shall count ballots according to the following rules:

(1) A voter may mark a ballot only by filling in, making "X" marks, diagonal, horizontal, or vertical marks, solid marks, stars, circles, asterisks, checks, or plus signs that are clearly spaced in the oval opposite the name of the candidate, proposition, or question that the voter desires to designate.

(9) Write-in votes are not invalidated by writing in the name of a candidate whose name is printed on the ballot unless the election board determines, on the basis of other evidence, that the ballot was so marked for the purpose of identifying the ballot.

(11) A vote for a write-in candidate, other than a write-in vote for governor and lieutenant governor, shall be counted if the oval is filled in for that candidate and if the name, as it appears on the write-in declaration of candidacy, of the candidate or the last name of the candidate is written in the space provided.

(b) The rules set out in this section are mandatory and there are no exceptions to them. A ballot may not be counted unless marked in compliance with these rules.

Their Secretary of State is also right in that subsection 9 says that Miller's write-in's should count as long as they weren't used to identify the individual ballot.

If they don't like the rules, they should change them for the next election. For this one, Miller is right.

libertythor
11-10-2010, 06:04 PM
Votes should not be counted that display the voter was obviously ignorant in casting their vote. It isn't as if Murkowski's name isn't proliferated enough to the point that you could be ignorant of how to spell her name because you have never seen it before. A reasonable voter with common knowledge would be able to spell Murkowski's name correctly. I would agree with the Judge if Murkowski was running for office in 19th century Kentucky, where a reasonable voter might have never seen her name spelled correctly, and therefore it would be an unreasonable burden to demand that all write-in votes be spelled correctly.

That is what I am saying. Add to that the provision of the list of write-in candidates that can be copied from and the fact that a simple mistake can be corrected by spoiling the ballot and asking for a new one.

Feeding the Abscess
11-10-2010, 06:21 PM
I think this quote, which is ironically the signature of the OP, says it all:

"That's one thing about freedom; you have to tolerate the nonsense too." - Ron Paul

libertythor
11-10-2010, 06:27 PM
I think this quote, which is ironically the signature of the OP, says it all:

"That's one thing about freedom; you have to tolerate the nonsense too." - Ron Paul

That is true. This will be decided in our oral and public adversarial justice system thanks to the write-in laws not being the clearest. Let's thank our lucky stars that we aren't like many nations where the system is more Napoleonic.

It is very rare that a write-in race comes to this point, and this may set jurisprudence for future write-in campaigns.

In 2004, the write-ins for Donna Frye won the vote count for Mayor of San Diego, but enough voters spelled her last name as "Fry" and caused the second place winner to pull ahead.

tpreitzel
11-10-2010, 06:31 PM
Since when do we agree to obey bad laws?

I think the intent of the voter should be taken into consideration.

In certain respects, this situation reminds me of the 14th amendment to the US Constitution. Although intended to clarify certain issues, the amendment unnecessarily muddied the waters, e.g. encroached on the common law definition of natural born citizen. Similarly, this Alaskan law was meant to clarify certain issues, but in the process reduced the decision to specifics and eliminated the original intent of the voter.

low preference guy
11-10-2010, 06:32 PM
Since when do we agree to obey bad laws?

I think the intent of the voter should be taken into consideration.

Since always?


Forum Guidelines

+ No promotion of illegal activities.

JoshLowry
11-10-2010, 06:33 PM
User was given an infraction for this post.

MRoCkEd
11-10-2010, 06:42 PM
Dammit, Judge Nap!

wormyguy
11-10-2010, 06:43 PM
Luckily, he's no longer a judge, and he's not in Alaska.

(Speaking of which, I bet the Judge was one of the most written in people this last election).

Knightskye
11-11-2010, 03:53 PM
Glad to hear that my misspelling of Smedley Butler as a write-in for Adjutant General last week should count. ;)

:D


lol @ the OP misspelling the word misspelled in the title of a thread talking about allowing misspelled write-ins to count... :D

Lol, damn it.

MozoVote
11-11-2010, 04:52 PM
I'm coming to think Miller is damaging himself to drag this out. It's obvious that 90% of the ballots are for Murkowski. He will begin to look like someone attempting to thwart the voters intent, over technicalities.

I remember public perception souring on Norm Coleman and Al Gore, late in their attempts to win via the courts.

You have to "Know when to fold 'em".

RonPaulFanInGA
11-11-2010, 05:01 PM
Sounds like he doesn't know Alaskan election law or that there are two Lisa Ms.

There is only one Lisa M.: Lisa Murkowski.

There is another one who has a middle initial 'm', as in: Lisa M. Something.

How many people do you think wrote in "Lisa M." that intended to vote for some no-name who filed five days before November 2nd? Are there even that many ballots actually marked "Lisa M." anyway? Sure doesn't sound like it.

Knightskye
11-11-2010, 05:20 PM
I can't find video of it.

pcosmar
11-11-2010, 05:24 PM
There is only one Lisa M.: Lisa Murkowski.

There is another one who has a middle initial 'm', as in: Lisa M. Something.

How many people do you think wrote in "Lisa M." that intended to vote for some no-name who filed five days before November 2nd? Are there even that many ballots actually marked "Lisa M." anyway? Sure doesn't sound like it.

It's called "grasping at straws".
:(