Appeals Court Rules Ohio Must Make Early Voting Available To All Voters

[RandySF]

The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled on Friday that Ohio must make early voting during the three days before the election available to all voters if it's available to military members and voters who live overseas. The ruling upheld a lower court's decision.

"The State’s asserted goal of accommodating the unique situation of members of the military, who may be called away at a moment’s notice in service to the nation, is certainly a worthy and commendable goal," the court ruled. "However, while there is a compelling reason to provide more opportunities for military voters to cast their ballots, there is no corresponding satisfactory reason to prevent non-military voters from casting their ballots as well."


http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/appeals-court-rules-ohio-must-make-early-voting

[WillyT]

1. K & R !!!

[malaise]

2. This is huge - Rev Al about to discuss now n/t

[Cha]

3. This is Amazingly Fantastic! All that time

we were so worried about the attempts of the gopricks to Suppress Voting in Ohio.. they LOST!

[abumbyanyothername]

4. 3 days? That's all?

Wow. That's criminal.

The early voting period should be at least two weeks, if not a month.

[Ms. Toad]

5. Early voting has already started.

The first day was Tuesday (Oct 2). This ruling only impacts whether they have to allow early voting on the last weekend before the election.

Guess I'll be working on Saturday 11/3 and Monday 11/5...I was asked to be an observer an hour a day for 3 days. I figured I could contribute that much to make sure things ran smoothly.

By the time the info came out it had turned into 4. When the guide came out it changed from an hour a day to all day on 4 days (if my work allows me to be there all day - but at least opening, closing, and noon). I'm guessing I'll now be asked to show up on Saturday to make sure they actually open...

[abumbyanyothername]

6. Reading the opinion I see I was confused.

They do look pretty bad, and I think a Voting Rights case could be brought and won that they were targeting specifically urban, African-American voters.

[Ms. Toad]

7. They clearly were -

and both the case itself and opinion were confusing.

We've had early voting running right up to the election for several years. They tried to cut it back for everyone but the military. When the selective cutback was challenged, they argued that the suit was an attempt to cut off early voting by the military, when it was really to keep early voting for everyone else. That frame bled into the case, adding to the confusion.

Did you catch the date error early in the opinion? (The referenced something which had already happened in November 2012. Makes me suspect it was written pretty quickly and may well have more errors.)