Free and Fair
The majority opinion of the Sixth Circuit panel in this Ohio provisional ballot case is, in my judgment, the most significant application of Bush v. Gore in the decade since that precedent was decided. The reason is that this new decision contains an extensive analysis of what Bush v. Gore requires with respect to the category of cases for which that precedent is most germane: disputes about how local election officials treated particular ballots as they decided whether or not to count them. Full comment. (Also see Charles Stewart's analysis of Footnote 24 of the Opinion)
I arrived at work this morning with a couple of new thoughts about this interesting Ohio provisional ballot case.
Here's some questions I would ask both sides at the oral argument, if I were a judge in the case. The answers might make a difference in what I thought the proper outcome should be.
It is not a high profile race. But it may create a high profile precedent.
Election Law at Moritz is nonpartisan and does not endorse, support, or oppose any candidate, campaign, or party. Opinions expressed by individuals associated with Election Law at Moritz, either on this web site or in connection with conferences or other activities undertaken by the program, represent solely the views of the individuals offering the opinions and not the program itself. Election Law at Moritz institutionally does not represent any clients or participate in any litigation. Individuals affiliated with the program may in their own personal capacity participate in campaign or election activity, or engage in pro bono representation of clients other than partisan candidates or organizations.