[EL] top two ruling

[David A. Holtzman]

> "any voter who knows enough to sue over this issue would fail on the 
> claim because she could not be deceived by the state on this point."

Moreover, aren't voters supposed to know that write-in votes are only 
valid for candidates on the list of certified write-in candidates?
That list should always be empty in top-two general elections.
   - dah


On 8/24/2011 3:35 PM, Rick Hasen wrote:
>
>
>     Federal District Court, on Its Own Motion, Grants Summary Judgment
>     for CA, Rejecting Challenge to Top-Two Primary
>     <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=22211>
>
> Posted on August 24, 2011 3:34 pm 
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=22211> by Rick Hasen 
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> You can read the district court's 17-page order here 
> <http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/146-00-Order-Granting-Summary-Judgment.pdf>. 
> Not only did the challengers to the law fail in their attempt to get 
> parts of Prop. 14 struck down, the district court, after giving notice 
> to the challengers, granted summary judgment for the state.
>
> I thought the strongest argument of the challengers was to the quirk 
> in the law that allows voters to write in the name of a candidate 
> during the second round of the election (between the top two 
> vote-getters in round one), but then not to count such votes.  Here is 
> how the court dealt with that issue:
>
>     To the extent Plaintiffs argue that their constitutional rights
>     have been violated because SB6 "deceives both candidates and
>     voters" by giving the "illusion" that write-in voting in a general
>     election is permissible, (Mot. at 16-18), the Court finds this
>     argument unavailing. SB6 gives no such illusion. Rather, SB6 is
>     very clear that write-in votes will not be counted. Cal. Elec.
>     Code § 8606 ("A person whose name has been written on the ballot
>     as a write-in candidate at the general election for a
>     voter-nominated office shall not be counted."). Furthermore, on
>     March 2, 2011, Bowen's Chief Counsel clarified that SB6 would
>     allow Frederick to run in the general election only if he was "one
>     of the top-two voters getters at the primary election." (SUF No.
>     28; Dutta Decl., Exh. X.) Hence, both Frederick and Wilson were
>     aware that write-in votes in the general election would not be
>     counted. (DSUF No. 45.) Neither California law nor California's
>     elections officials have been unclear about California's write-in
>     restrictions.
>
> I suppose this means that any voter who knows enough to sue over this 
> issue would fail on the claim because she could not be deceived by the 
> state on this point.
>
> -- 
> David A. Holtzman, M.P.H., J.D.
> david at holtzmanlaw.com
>
> Notice: This email (including any files transmitted with it) may be 
> confidential, for use only by intended recipients.  If you are not an 
> intended recipient or a person responsible for delivering this email 
> to an intended recipient, be advised that you have received this email 
> in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing or 
> copying of this email is strictly prohibited.  If you have received 
> this email in error, please immediately notify the sender and discard 
> all copies.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20110824/62f5797c/attachment.html>