OSU Navigation Bar

Election Law @ Moritz Home Page

Election Law @ Moritz

Election Law @ Moritz


Information & Analysis

December, 2010

Below are postings from December, 2010. (See Archives | Recent Headlines)

Ohio Cases on Counting Provisional Ballots Cast in Wrong Precincts

Dec. 29 - ElectionLaw@Moritz is following two Ohio cases that raise questions regarding whether to count provisional ballots cast in incorrect precincts due to poll worker error. Hunter v. Hamilton County Board of Elections challenges whether poll worker error may be considered when deciding whether to count provisional ballots, and the process for determining whether such error occurred. The case originated in federal court, and the federal District Court required the Board of Elections to investigate whether some provisional ballots were wrongly cast due to poll worker error. The case focuses on the correct application of state election law. Sarantou v. Lucas County Board of Elections also examines whether to count provisional ballots cast in incorrect precincts because of incorrect instructions from poll workers. Plaintiffs argue that state law, using a combination of statutes and directives from the Secretary of State, provides only very limited circumstances under which provisional ballots cast in incorrect precincts may be counted, and requires clear and convincing evidence of poll worker error.

State Supreme Court rules against Miller in Alaska

Dec. 27 - The Alaska Supreme Court on Wednesday (12/23) issued an opinion ruling against MIller in the case involving the Alaska Senate seat.  However, Miller has vowed to continue the fight in federal court, while not challenging the certification of Murkowski.

State court ruling in Alaska

Dec. 13 - Regarding the Alaska Senate election, the Alaska Superior Court at Juneau has granted a motion for summary judgment, ruling in favor of the State. The Court has stayed the order to allow for possible appeals to the state supreme court.  A decision from Miller on whether to appeal has yet to be made.  UPDATE:  Late Monday, Miller filed a notice of appeal with the Alaska Supreme Court.

Commentary

Donald B. Tobin

FAQ on social welfare organizations

Donald B. Tobin

The Frank E. and Virginia H. Bazler Designated Professor in Business Law and a senior fellow at Election Law @ Moritz explains the nuances of social welfare organizations and federal regulations related to them.

more commentary...

In the News

Donald B. Tobin

How Did The IRS Get The Job Of Vetting Political Activity?

Professor Donald Tobin was interviewed by the Boston NPR station on its show Here & Now about the Internal Revenue Service's investigation into groups classified as social welfare organizations (marked by the 501(c)(4) tax classification). The IRS was in search of groups that are not focusing primarly on the social welfare of the country, but have a strong political advocacy facet. Political advocacy groups might want to be classified as 501(c)(4) organizations because under that classification they do not have to disclose their donors.

"The key is if you are going to be engaged in candidate-type advocacy, and if you're going to intervene in elections and engage in election advocacy, we want disclosure of who your donors are," Tobin said.

“What groups are trying to do here is avoid having to disclose,” Tobin continued. “By earning the classification of social welfare, they’re avoiding the campaign disclosure that’s required for political organizations. So that’s really the underpinning of why we have this mess of the IRS having to get in and investigate and figure out whether an organization is political or not.”

more EL@M in the news...

Info & Analysis

Ohio Secretary of State Releases Report on Voter Fraud

Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted released a report today on voter fraud in Ohio during the 2012 general election. In a press release, Husted stated that while voter fraud does exist in Ohio, "it is not an epidemic." According to the report, 135 voter fraud cases have been referred to law enforcement for possible prosecution. Twenty of these cases involved voters attempting to vote in Ohio and another state. The report shows that 115 cases were referred to local Ohio county prosecutors. According to Husted as quoted in the Columbus Dispatch, most of these cases involved voters attempting to vote twice within the state, and in a "majority" of instances, only one vote was counted.

more info & analysis...