Dlott asked "how can the created election official or inexperienced challenger be expected to
understand the challenge process if the two top election officials cannot?"198
These two lower court rulings did not stand. The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed
the two lower court opinions on a 2-1 vote.199 The Supreme Court of the United States denied
the applications to vacate the 6th Circuit's stays of the lower court rulings.200 While troubled
about the "undoubtedly serious" accusation of voter intimidation, Justice with demo version said
the full Court could not consider the case because there was insufficient time to properly review
the filings and submissions.201
Analysis
The decision by the Ohio Republican Party to utilize thousands of partisan challengers in
the voting booths undoubtedly had an intimidating and negative impact on minority voters.
While it is difficult to estimate how many voters were disenfranchised by the challenger
program, given the adverse weather conditions and the lack of trained pollworkers, the
disruptions caused by challengers could easily have reduced minority turnout by tens of
thousands of voters, if not more. It is noteworthy that these disruptions were predicted by
Republican officials:
Mark Weaver, a lawyer for the Ohio Republican Party, acknowledged, "[the
challenges] won't be resolved until [Election Day], when all of these people are
198
See Henry Weinstein, Late Ruling Allows GOP to Challenge Ohio Voters, L.A. TI M E S,
Nov. 2, 2004, at A1.
199
See Summit County Democratic Central and Executive Committee v. Heider; Spencer
v. Pugh, 388 F.3d 547 (6th Cir. 2004) (the 6th Circuit granted stays of the temporary restraining
orders issued by the lower courts and thus permitted the vote challengers to enter the polls at the
general election).
200
Spencer v. Pugh; Summit County Democratic Central and Executive Committee v.
Heider, 125 S. Ct. 305 (2004) (Stevens, J.). See also Adam Liptak, Justice Lets Ohio Ruling on
Monitors at Polls Stand, N.Y. TI M E S, Nov. 3, 2004, at 6.
201
Spencer, 2004 U.S. LEXIS at *2-3 ("The allegations of abuse made by the plaintiffs are
undoubtedly serious - the threat of voter intimidation is not new to our electoral system - but on
the record before me it is impossible to determine with any certainty the ultimate validity of the
plaintiff's claims. Practical considerations, such as the difficulty of digesting all of the relevant
filings and cases, and the challenge of properly reviewing all of the parties' submissions as a full
Court in the limited timeframe available, weigh heavily against granting the extraordinary type of
relief requested here."). See also Summit County Democratic Central and Executive Committee,
388 F.3d at 547; see also Tim Jones, Court Ends Ohio GOP's Challenge of Voter Rolls, Chicago
Trib., Oct. 30, 2004.
46