I'm ... stunned, really.
Bush administration lawyers argued in three closely contested states last week that only the Justice Department, and not voters themselves, may sue to enforce the voting rights set out in the Help America Vote Act, which was passed in the aftermath of the disputed 2000 election.
Veteran voting-rights lawyers expressed surprise at the government's action, saying that closing the courthouse door to aspiring voters would reverse decades of precedent.
Since the civil rights era of the 1960s, individuals have gone to federal court to enforce their right to vote, often with the support of groups such as the NAACP, the AFL-CIO, the League of Women Voters or the state parties. And until now, the Justice Department and the Supreme Court had taken the view that individual voters could sue to enforce federal election law.
But in legal briefs filed in connection with cases in Ohio, Michigan and Florida, the administration's lawyers argue that the new law gives Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft the exclusive power to bring lawsuits to enforce its provisions. These include a requirement that states provide "uniform and nondiscriminatory" voting systems, and give provisional ballots to those who say they have registered but whose names do not appear on the rolls. [...] Saturday's decision in that case, and in other recent cases from Michigan and Florida, gave the department a partial victory. On the one hand, the courts agreed with state officials who said voters may not obtain a provisional ballot if they go to the wrong polling place.
However, all three courts that ruled on the matter rejected the administration's broader view that voters may not sue state election officials in federal court.
Still, the issue may resurface and prove significant next week if disputes arise over voter qualifications. Some election-law experts believe the administration has set the stage for arguing that the federal courts may not second-guess decisions of state election officials in Ohio, Florida or elsewhere.
I don't know why it's so surprising to me that Our Glorious Shrub and Aschcroft's Star Chamber would make this argument. But note: they did not make this argument in federal court in Illinois, or in New York, or even in Georgia or Alabama, all states in which -- according to opinion polls -- the results of the presidential contest would not seem to be in doubt. Only in states in which such lawsuits might be likely, and where there's considerable uncertainty over how things might turn out. Assuming that the government had won, it would be nearly impossible to get such a ruling overturned before the election.
I keep thinking that there are limits to the extent to which this administration will misuse its powers for partisan advantage. Clearly, there are none.
Remember that.
Posted by iain at October 30, 2004 12:52 PM
