Judge Sides With Obama On Ohio Early Voting Suit Despite Romney Attacks

pbrauer · Aug 31, 2012

:thumbs: Good News for everyone.

Ohio early voting lawsuit: Judge sides with Obama campaign | TPMMuckraker

A federal judge sided with the Obama campaign on Friday and ruled that Ohio made an “arbitrary” decision when it took away early-voting rights for most voters but carved out a special exemption for military and overseas voters.

In granting a preliminary injunction against early voting restrictions, the judge ruled that the “public interest is served by restoring in-person early voting to all Ohio voters.”

Earlier this month, the Romney campaign attacked the Obama campaign’s lawsuit, calling it an “outrage” and falsely accusing the president of trying to take away early voting rights for members of the military. In reality, the lawsuit was trying to ensure that most voters, including servicemen and women, had the chance to cast their ballots early.

There seems to be a party pooper:

Late update: Ohio Attorney General Mike DeWine says he will appeal the ruling.

Arbo · Aug 31, 2012

Why would most citizens need to 'vote early'? Is it really that damn difficult to set one day every 4 years aside and ensure you get your backside there?

tererun · Aug 31, 2012

So I guess it is another republican failre to deny basic rights to citizens they don't like. Is this the best you can do to get Romney elected? You have to cheat because no one but the crazies actually likes him? Even his own party chokes on their own vomit while trying to speak positively of him.

It seems clear romney fears a fair fight more than anything else in the world.

tererun · Aug 31, 2012

Arbo said:
Why would most citizens need to 'vote early'? Is it really that damn difficult to set one day every 4 years aside and ensure you get your backside there?

It is called convenience, working, taking care of kids, and general life. Why do you fear the ability of working people to vote? is it because you know that only the rich would vote for romney, and they can make their own schedules and never have to do anything for themselves because they have servants? Awe, i feel so bad for your guy having to have a fair fight in this case.

Peter King · Aug 31, 2012

Arbo said:
Why would most citizens need to 'vote early'? Is it really that damn difficult to set one day every 4 years aside and ensure you get your backside there?

In a perfect world yes, everybody should go to the polls on voting day. But reality is that there are long lines of voters waiting to get to the polls who could have voted early and saved everyone else who did not want to (or could) go and vote early a good deal of time. By them having voted early, the lines should be a lot shorter.

Arbo · Aug 31, 2012

tererun said:
It is called convenience, working, taking care of kids, and general life.

Yeah, I work, I take care of kids, I do extra for the community, but you know what, I know what day is election day, it's kinda known date. So arranging things on one day to ensure I get there is not exactly hard work. I realize there are a lot of lazy people would would rather have 'options'... but that doesn't hide that they simply are too lazy to put forth the effort to be where they need to be for a short period of time one day every 4 years.

The rest of your post is just the typic extreme left wing emotional nonsense that is often all that is seen from you.

Arbo · Aug 31, 2012

Peter King said:
In a perfect world yes, everybody should go to the polls on voting day. But reality is that there are long lines of voters waiting to get to the polls who could have voted early and saved everyone else who did not want to (or could) go and vote early a good deal of time. By them having voted early, the lines should be a lot shorter.

Ah, more about the convenience of the lazy. If I have to stand in line for 12 hours, I do so. I don't care, it is my right, and I will wait my turn with all the others that do their civic duty.

Peter King · Aug 31, 2012

Arbo said:
Ah, more about the convenience of the lazy. If I have to stand in line for 12 hours, I do so. I don't care, it is my right, and I will wait my turn with all the others that do their civic duty.

But most people will not have 12 hours to wait on a working day.

Arbo · Aug 31, 2012

Peter King said:
But most people will not have 12 hours to wait on a working day.

I generally wouldn't, but if it is required, I deal with it. It's part of the process.

Gina · Aug 31, 2012

Arbo said:
I generally wouldn't, but if it is required, I deal with it. It's part of the process.

Or they don't have vacation pay to offset the unpaid time.

I don't understand why it would bother anyone to have extra days to allow citizens to exercise their right to vote.

CriticalThought · Aug 31, 2012

Arbo said:
Ah, more about the convenience of the lazy. If I have to stand in line for 12 hours, I do so. I don't care, it is my right, and I will wait my turn with all the others that do their civic duty.

What do you have against making it easier for people to practice their rights? If anything that is something we should be encouraging. You call it lazy for someone to take time out of their day to go voting, just because they do it on a different day than voting day and they avoid unnecessary hassles like waiting in long lines for hours? It sounds to me like you are some sort of masochist or this is just a poorly veiled attempt to chastise people who might need early voting because they on average do not favor the candidate you support.

Hairytic · Aug 31, 2012

Arbo said:
Yeah, I work, I take care of kids, I do extra for the community, but you know what, I know what day is election day, it's kinda known date. So arranging things on one day to ensure I get there is not exactly hard work. I realize there are a lot of lazy people would would rather have 'options'... but that doesn't hide that they simply are too lazy to put forth the effort to be where they need to be for a short period of time one day every 4 years.

The rest of your post is just the typic extreme left wing emotional nonsense that is often all that is seen from you.

There are a lot of good reasons why some people need to vote early. Claiming they are lazy is simply stupid. SOme people will be having medical procedures or they may be out of town during the regular voting time. I don't see why people like you must insult those who don't agree with you. Use your imagination. I can take 1 minute and think of hundreds of reasons why some people would need to vote early because they won't be available on voting day.

Hairytic · Aug 31, 2012

Gina said:
Or they don't have vacation pay to offset the unpaid time.

I don't understand why it would bother anyone to have extra days to allow citizens to exercise their right to vote.

I don't understand either. Some of these people just ooze with anger. If this is what Romeny/Ryan inspires, then I'm glad I won't be voting for them.

Dickieboy · Aug 31, 2012

After a curtsy review of the issue the controversy appears more complex than another partisan conspiracy. The EXTENDED early voting days was legislation passed by REPUBLICANS after the debacle in 2004 (long lines at voting precincts on Election Day). Recently there were requests (supposedly) from election officials from both parties requested and supported the reduction in early voting days. This all seems innocuous but where it gets dicey is that the repeal of the ‘extended days’ was on the ballot for referendum for the November election but the GOP state officials passed the repeal negating the referendum. One could argue the legislators were catering to the requests of the election officials presumably wanting more time to ‘validate’ the vote. Logically the electorate would surely support their personal desire, extended time, which would negate the desire of the election officials. The ultimate question remains whether the EO’s really NEEDED (or asked) for the 3-4 ‘voting free’ days prior to Election day. In the end if the GOP wished for more time in 2004 and got it, then now don’t the old cliché is pertinent ‘be careful what you wish for’… would seem now they (the GOP) needs to suck it up and mobilize their electorate if they want a victory.

Arbo · Sep 1, 2012

Gina said:
Or they don't have vacation pay to offset the unpaid time.

That's just more excuses.

Arbo · Sep 1, 2012

Hairytic said:
SOme people will be having medical procedures or they may be out of town during the regular voting time.

Valid reasons, but of course, they are such a small fraction of the people that vote, it doesn't play into the need for everyone to be able to vote some day other than election day. And just about every state has something to take care of that situation, I'd guess every state probably does.

pbrauer · Sep 1, 2012

Personally, I think it's stupid to have election day on a Tuesday. I think the election should be held on Friday, Saturday and Sunday.

Here in Oregon we have vote by mail, so we have weeks to vote.

Fruityfact · Sep 1, 2012

Whats wrong with people voting early...is it hurting anyone?
No, it is just giving everyone who wants to vote a chance to vote.

Arbo · Sep 1, 2012

Yes, let everyone vote early and often. I believe one side favors that motto.

But ask them about simply showing some form of proof that you are who you say you are, and are a citizen, well, it's a different story then, eh?

Fruityfact · Sep 1, 2012

Arbo said:
Yes, let everyone vote early and often. I believe one side favors that motto.

But ask them about simply showing some form of proof that you are who you say you are, and are a citizen, well, it's a different story then, eh?

Do you know how many cases of in person voter fraud there have been..go ahead, enlighten us on those "staggering" numbers

Gina · Sep 1, 2012

Arbo said:
That's just more excuses.

Why do you take it so personally? How does it hurt you to allow more time to cast ballots? Why should anyone be put through a 12 hour wait or give up their right because they cannot make it to the polls when there is a readily available solution?

Fruityfact · Sep 1, 2012

Gina said:
Why do you take it so personally? How does it hurt you to allow more time to cast ballots? Why should anyone be put through a 12 hour wait or give up their right because they cannot make it to the polls when there is a readily available solution?

My point exactly

Arbo · Sep 1, 2012

Fruityfact said:
Do you know how many cases of in person voter fraud there have been..

Irrelevant. You must be a citizen to vote, it's about the Constitution. But I understand you don't believe in the Constitution.

Gina said:
Why do you take it so personally?

Ah, more of the liberal emotion and the silly 'if you are against xxxx, you want old people to die!' left wing argument. Fail.

Fruityfact · Sep 1, 2012

Arbo said:
Irrelevant. You must be a citizen to vote, it's about the Constitution. But I understand you don't believe in the Constitution.
Ah, more of the liberal emotion and the silly 'if you are against xxxx, you want old people to die!' left wing argument. Fail.

It was 10 cases of in person voter fraud in the past 310million votes...I'll look for the source but those numbers are right.
So instead of addressing the question-who does increasing the time allow to vote hurt or what negative consequences are there of letting people vote early-you attack him..you don't answer you attack.

Wiseone · Sep 1, 2012

In an opinion by Judge Peter Economus, a federal court agreed with the Obama campaign on Friday that the Ohio anti-voter law must be suspended:

“A citizen has a constitutionally protected right to participate in elections on an equal basis with other citizens in the jurisdiction.” In Ohio, that right to participate equally has been abridged by Ohio Revised Code ‘ 3509.03 and the Ohio Secretary of State’s further interpretation of that statute with regard to in-person early voting. In 2005, Ohio expanded participation in absentee balloting and in-person early voting to include all registered Ohio voters. Now, “in-person early voting” has been redefined by the Ohio legislature to limit Plaintiffs’ access to the polls. This Court must determine whether preliminary injunctive relief should be granted to Plaintiffs on their claim that Ohio’s restriction of in-person early voting deprives them of their fundamental right to vote. Following Supreme Court precedent, this Court concludes that Plaintiffs have stated a constitutional claim that is likely to succeed on the merits. As a result—and as explained below—this Court grants Plaintiffs’ motion for preliminary injunction.

Amusingly, the court’s opinion relies on the Supreme Court’s infamous decision in Bush v. Gore to reach this holding, citing Bush‘s statement that “[h]aving once granted the right to vote on equal terms, the State may not, by later arbitrary and disparate treatment, value one person’s vote over that of another.” Judge Economus’ decision will be appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, a Republican-leaning court with a history of legally-challenged partisan decisions benefiting the Republican Party. So it remains to be seen whether Economus’ decision will have staying power.

BREAKING: Federal Court Strikes Down Ohio Law Restricting Early Voting | ThinkProgress

Fark.com comes through for me again.

I still don't see how this violates anyone's rights, or does anything but make it easier for vote, which is what we should all be doing. If I was a resident of Ohio I wouldn't feel any kind of disenfranchisement because people back home could vote early like I do because I'm in the military.

All this crap about people being laziness if they can't get to the polls on a certain day is a bunch of bull****, its entirely subjective and it ignore basic Constitutional rights like "Equal protection under the law." How arrogant and egotistical do you have to be to believe that because YOU think someone is lazy, you can deny them their right to vote. Hell you haven't even looked at why they couldn't make it to the poll, just assume its laziness. You know some people can't just take the day off work to stand in line for 12 hours, and thats a whole other than if lines are really 12 hours long than thats some disfranchisement.

Pull your head out of your ass Arbo and give me a real LEGAL reason why this law should stand.