Wisc Judge Tosses GOP Vote Suppression Lawsuit

by MAL Contends, Thu Oct 23, 2008 at 08:41:58 AM EDT

Update IV: Opinion - Order and Hearing Transcript (Case No 08CV4085)

Update II: GOP AG to appeal. Hoping to get to the Wisconsin Supreme Court where the GOP enjoys a 4-2-1 majority, though the case (J B Van Hollen vs. Government Accountability Board et al, (Dane County Case Number 2008CV004085)) is so clear-cut, even the WI SC might rule against the GOP. In any event, this will not result in any new voter suppression rules that the GOP had hoped for.

Update: Judge: "Nothing in state or federal law requires that there be a data match as a prerequisite for a citizen's right to vote," Judge Maryann Sumi said in dismissing Van Hollen's lawsuit that tried to use the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) as a voter suppression tool.

Dane County Judge Maryann Sumi has "dismissed a lawsuit by Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen to require the state elections agency to check voter registrations against other state databases dating to 2006, which critics said could have thrown hundreds of thousands of registrations into doubt," the Wisconsin State Journal reports.

Nationwide, the GOP is attempting to suppress Democratically leaning voters to stave off a landslide defeat, and is unquestionably attempting to use HAVA to this purpose.

The case deals a political and legal body blow to Wisconsin Attorney General and John McCain co-chair J.B. Van Hollen, and delivers a victory to the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board and other voting rights advocates.

Lester Pines, a lawyer for the board, called the ruling 'an absolute validation of the position of the board.' 'Judge Sumi's decision was exceptionally scholarly, well-reasoned and supported by law,' Pines said.

Similar voter suppression efforts by Republicans are under way in Ohio and numerous other states.

The opinion will likely be posted soon at Election Law-Moritz.

Tags: 2008 Presidential election, breaking Wisconsin political news, civil rights, HAVA, J.B. Van Hollen, MARK PITSCH, Van Hollen v. Government Accountability Board, Wisconsin State Journal (all tags)

Comments

13 Comments

Sort by

permalink

They won't be able to hide much longer

Voter suppression is not going to be the shadow killer that it used to be in the modern age, because of the internet and blatant malfeasance of suppression's greatest champions.

by Dracomicron 2008-10-23 08:49AM | 0 recs

permalink

this is all stage setting

Rush, Hannity, et all need an excuse for what is coming their way on Nov 4th.

it can't be the abject failure of bush or the disillusionment with the whole Right Wing Agenda?

After all, this is a conservative country, as they never stopped claiming as accepted fact.

If you look historically, you will even see democrats going along with the historical revisionism that Joe Kennedy "fixed" the JFK election with help from Richard Daley.

There is at least conflicting information, and there SURELY is no smoking gun, but the Republicans, with their ability to stay on message and drive a meme have almost made it accepted fact the Nixon was the victim of voter shenanigans.

Get ready for the echo chamber to try to invalidate Obama, and in fact, any loss by any Republican this year.

by WashStateBlue 2008-10-23 09:03AM | 0 recs

permalink

They are already trying

to delegitimize Obama with all this accusation of voter fraud with ACORN. We won't hear the end of it for at least a year after the election.

by SocialDem 2008-10-23 09:09AM | 0 recs

permalink

Finally some

common sense. I would have been one of those people potentially taken off the list. Though I already voted by early vote.

by SocialDem 2008-10-23 09:05AM | 0 recs

permalink

It's all that fraud and stuff

Can't wait to read the opinion as the Wisconsin Atty Gen JB Van Hollen will be revealed to be as incompetant as the rest of the GOP hacks in the national DOJ.

The NAACP, civil rights groups like the Brennan Center, the ACLU and the Lawyers Comm. for Civil Rights Under Law versus the Republicans.

We win, again. Get used to it, GOP!

by MAL Contends 2008-10-23 09:09AM | 0 recs

permalink

I think the next step is to

replace Van Hollen with a Democrat

by SocialDem 2008-10-23 09:10AM | 0 recs

permalink

Van Hollen won, at least in part

because of internecine infighting.

The Dane County Executive, Cathleen Falk, feeding her ego for the second time in a state-wide race, struck again two years ago, narrowly toppling the sitting Dem Atty General in Wisconsin, Peg Lautenschalager. One of those situations where a more liberal Madison electorate put the more liberal politician over the top in a primary. But as Dane County Exec, Falk will always be seen by rural Wisconsin Dems as too liberal, and so JB Van Hollen beat her - in a year when the Dems not only routed Repugs in every other state-wide race and flipped a Congressional seat, but also took the state senate and came within three seats of taking a solidly Republican-held state Assembly too.

Why "Kathleen Falk" isn't a dirty word in Wisconsin by now I'll never understand.

by aggieric 2008-10-23 09:31AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Van Hollen won, at least in part

This is not exactly how it happened. Kathleen Falk lost the primary in Dane County. Peg beat her there, because Peg was seen amongst local progressives as their candidate. Probably with good reason - Peg was the best AG in the country. What some folks around here thought was that Kathleen was simply feeding her ego and/or serving Governor Jim Doyle, who had sparred with Peg.

Kathleen won the (D) primary by spending heavily in northwestern and northcentral Wisconsin.

Kathleen lost the primary because Doyle voters in Dane County simply did not vote in the AG race. Had they voted for Kathleen like they did for Doyle (and Tammy Baldwin, and all the other D's), Kathleen would have won.

Your analysis relies too much upon conventional wisdom and not enough on clear-eyed analysis. It was not because anyone was too liberal.

"Kathleen Falk" is not a dirty word in Wisconsin probably because a) she's a really good County Executive and b) she is a very talented politician.

Politics isn't so black and white as you're trying to make it be.

by Peter from WI 2008-10-23 12:08PM | 0 recs

permalink

Oh my god, you're totally correct.

I'm an ignorant prat.

http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx ?id=496487

by aggieric 2008-10-23 01:14PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Oh my god, you're totally correct.

The article you posted has nothing to do with the points I made. Kathleen didn't win the primary on the back on Dane County liberals. She won the primary despite Dane County progressives. Kathleen lost the general because of Dane County progressives not voting for her even though they were voting for Doyle.

by Peter from WI 2008-10-23 04:23PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: I think the next step is to

This is a good idea.

Who runs though? Brian Blanchard? John Chisholm? There isn't really an AG farm team of high-profile attorneys or DAs or US Attorneys (because USAs have been GOP for the Bush years...Peg was USA for Eastern WI under Clinton). There are no obvious choices amongst the legislators, Assembly or Senate. Here's your dark-horse choice: Louis Molepske from AD71 in Stevens Point.

by Peter from WI 2008-10-23 12:12PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Wisc Judge Tosses GOP Vote Suppression Lawsuit

GOP AG to appeal. Hoping to get to the Wisconsin Supreme Court where the GOP enjoys a 4-2-1 majority, though the case (J B Van Hollen vs. Government Accountability Board et al, (Dane County Case Number 2008CV004085)) is so clear-cut, even the WI SC might rule against the GOP. In any event, this will not result in any new voter suppression rules that the GOP had hoped for.

I would think the Republicans knew this, and they are just hoping to play the clock? If they play it late enough, then appealing to USSC might not have enough time.

Plus, all these moves are also just about creating chaos on voting day.

The more chaotic, the better for the Republicans.

by WashStateBlue 2008-10-23 10:34AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Wisc Judge Tosses GOP Vote Suppression Lawsuit

I'm pretty sure that Van Hollen only filed this in state court, not federal.

by Peter from WI 2008-10-23 12:09PM | 0 recs