[EL] obscure question

[Brian Landsberg]

In the 1960's a Louisiana voter registrar disqualified (African-American) applicants who could not state their age in years, months, and days. The applicant would have also stated her date of birth and would have dated the form.  (On the witness stand the registrar could not calculate her own age in years, months and days).  Registrar's rejection of these applications was held unlawful. Of course this was a race case, not a minority party case.

Sent from my iPhone

On Jul 30, 2012, at 10:06 PM, "Richard Winger" <richardwinger at yahoo.com<mailto:richardwinger at yahoo.com>> wrote:

Today the Libertarian Party submitted 42,000 signatures to be on the ballot in Pennsylvania.  The Elections office immediately examined all the signatures and lined out all the signatures in which the signer had not put "2012" in the date column.  In other words, one-third of the signers (14,000) just put the month and day, but not the year.

However, the state-printed form says at the bottom "Revised Jan. 2012", and Pennsylvania law did not permit the petition to circulate until February 2012.

Does anyone happen to be aware of any precedents on whether signatures on petitions are invalid, just because the form asks for the date and the signer puts only the month and day but not the year?

Pennsylvania requires 20,601 valid signatures this year.

Richard Winger
415-922-9779
PO Box 470296, San Francisco Ca 94147
_______________________________________________
Law-election mailing list
Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu<mailto:Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu>
http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20120731/2edc5c75/attachment.html>