Florida Voting Rights & Wrongs- Campaign for a Legal Election

Nathan Newman nathan at newman.org
Sat Nov 11 06:52:54 PST 2000


Please forward everthing below the header. Thanks.

For all the mocking of this election by US and foreign critics, the danger is that what is being mocked is the right of individual voters to challenge local election officials in the courts - a direct ideological assault on the Voting Rights Act and the whole history of the civil rights movement's use of the courts.

Attached is a statement of principles/op-ed by an ad-hoc Campaign for a Legal Election here at Yale Law School highlighting the deeper problem beyond Gore v. Bush in these elite media and politician calls to bypass recounts or the courts through a concession. There were and are serious violations of law in the election and the right to go to court is the only proper way to resolve many of them. A slow resolution is not something to be mocked but to be celebrated; as is stated in this message, any country can have a quick result after elections. There is nothing admirable in that. What is more admirable is a system that says that the denial of any person's right to vote is a matter of greater concern that even who is elected President.

-- Nathan Newman

=====================================================

Yale Law Students CAMPAIGN FOR A LEGAL ELECTION

Yale Law School 127 Wall Street New Haven, CT 06511

(203) 432-4888 spin at pantheon.yale.edu =====================================================

Any organization interested in signing onto the Campaign for a Legal Election's statement, please email spin at pantheon.yale.edu ---

How dare either candidate claim an election victory (or concede) before the facts of what happened in Florida are determined? Don't let the politicians or the pundits deprive Florida residents of their voting rights and the rest of the country of our democratic process.

Please do your part NOW to change the tone of the debate.

Don't let the press spin this story to force a hasty solution. Any country can have a quick result. America is special because we believe in the rule of law and the protection of constitutional rights. Let's set an example for the world by proceeding in a patient and dignified way. Any party or politician that seeks to claim this election prematurely will have violated our trust and threatened the legitimacy of our government both domestically and internationally. It is our responsibility to hold them accountable because we will pay the price.

Therefore, please do the following:

1) WRITE TO YOUR HOMETOWN PAPER (please see a sample op-ed piece below; feel free to use/edit any part of it for letters to the editor, etc.)

2) CALL IN TO TALK SHOWS where you live and in Florida. You can find out which staions there are by checking out www.broadcast.com .

3) SEND THIS AND OTHER E-MAILS TO FRIENDS AND FAMILY. LET PEOPLE KNOW THAT YOU WILL NOT ACCEPT A RUSH TO JUDGMENT BECAUSE THERE IS TOO MUCH AT STAKE.

FOLLOWING IS A STATEMENT OF PRINCIPLES THAT WE ENCOURAGE EVERYONE TO DISTRIBUTE TO FRIENDS AND/OR SUBSTANTIALLY EDIT AND SUBMIT TO THEIR LOCAL (HOMETOWN) PAPERS. DON'T DELAY: TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE!

========================== Voting Rights and Wrongs in Florida ==========================

Since Tuesday, many politicians and others have suggested that it is inappropriate for the results of the election in Florida to be subjected to a legal challenge. This attitude amounts to a fundamental assault on the Voting Rights Act and the right to vote guaranteed by state and federal constitutions.

The right to vote is the underpinning of our society. As the Supreme Court has stated, "other rights, even the most basic, are illusory if the right to vote is undermined." Equally important is the ability to enforce this right to vote. During the civil rights movement, people struggled and died not only for the right to vote itself, but also for the right to pursue legal action if the vote was denied. What James Baker decries as "unending legal wrangling" is the enforcement mechanism of our Constitution.

It is premature for either campaign to declare victory or concede defeat. It is neither up to Governor Bush nor Vice President Gore to concede defeat or assume victory until the choice of the people is clear. As the Florida Supreme Court has stated, "the real parties in interest" in a legal challenge to the results of an election "are the voters," not the candidates or their political parties.

There is too much at stake to let this election pass without scrutinizing the many reports of problems in Florida: * Thousands of voters in Palm Beach County may have been effectively denied their right to vote due to an illegal and unnecessarily confusing ballot design. * Polls closed while people were still in line in Tampa. * Voters were denied ballots on grounds that their precinct had changed. * Some election officials refused to allow translators in voting booths for Haitian-Americans in Miami. * Hispanic voters in Osceola County alleged they were required to produce two kinds of identification when only one was required. * At least two absentee ballots have already been invalidated due to fraudulent submission, in what may be a statewide campaign of absentee voter fraud.

Many have said that such "irregularities" exist in every election. Although that is unfortunately true, a systemic failure in our election process is not license to ignore the law, especially when the very outcome of the election may be at stake. In fact, it is only when elections are subjected to such intense scrutiny that problems such as poorly designed ballots or racial intimidation surface.

Courts have the responsibility to ensure that elections are conducted legally, and to order a new election if necessary. If the Palm Beach ballots violate Florida law, this is not a legal technicality; laws provide for a common format for ballots to ensure that the process is uniform and clear statewide, and that the election reflects the intentions of the populace. In fact, under Florida law, a new election is only required if a court finds that violations of elections laws created doubt as to whether the outcome of the election truly reflects the will of the people.

Many people have spoken about the rule of law. What the rule of law requires, however, is not a blind respect for the ballot count in an election marred by denials of the right to vote, but a healthy appreciation of the need for legal redress of any violations. Seeking legal redress is not being a "poor sport." Rather, it is protecting one's constitutional rights.

Other countries look to the United States as a bastion of legality, stability, and above all democracy. Some have suggested that the continued uncertainty over the outcome of the election is embarrassing, but far more embarrassing would be a rush to an incorrect result. Any country can have quick results. It is a testament to the strength of our democracy and our legal system that the most powerful people in our country must wait for the courts to completely address the concerns of even the most vulnerable American citizens.

As law students, we are especially concerned about the assault on the right to use the courts to preserve legal rights. The right to vote was granted to blacks only after the Civil War and made effective only after the Civil Rights movement, and was granted to women only after many years of organizing. To assert that the courts should not intervene to protect this right undermines the very right itself. The late Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall, a veteran of the Civil Rights movement himself, once stated that "the right to vote is preservative of all other rights." Surely, the ability, indeed the responsibility, to enforce this right is equally important.



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list