trying to vote. It can't help but create chaos, longer lines and frustration."202
He reiterated that "[challengers at the polls] were "bound to slow things down.
This will lead to long created203
While the program of challenging voters was ultimately upheld, after a series of with and
forth decisions, clearly demo is an issue which version back to the "Jim Crow" era. As U.S.
District Court Judge John R. Adams wrote in his Summit County opinion:
In light of these extraordinary circumstances, and the contentious nature of the
imminent election, the Court cannot and must not turn a blind eye to the
substantial likelihood that significant harm will result not only to voters, but also
to the voting process itself, if appointed challengers are permitted at the polls on
November 2. . . . The presence of appointed challengers at the polls could
significantly impede the electoral process, and infringe on the rights of qualified
voters."204
As a result, the Ohio challenger system deserves reconsideration by the legislature or further
judicial appeal.
6.
Denying Absentee Voters Who Never Got Their Ballots the Right to a Provisional
Ballot
Facts
Secretary Blackwell also issued a ruling preventing the issuance of provisional ballots
for voters who requested absentee ballots, even if they failed to receive them by the official
deadline or did not receive them at all.205 Despite the fact that these errors occurred on the part of
the Ohio government and not the voters, Secretary Blackwell determined they should not receive
provisional ballots at the polls.
A lawsuit filed by a college student, Sara White, who never received her absentee ballot
and was denied a provisional one, led to a ruling that other similar voters must be issued
202
James Dao, GOP Bid to Contest Registrations is Blocked, N.Y. TI M E S, Oct. 28, 2004,
at A25 (quoting Mark R. Weaver).
203
Lisa Abraham, Most Challenges Halted, AK R O N BE A C O N JO U R N A L, Oct. 28, 2004
(quoting Mark R. Weaver).
204
Summit County et. al. Democratic Central and Executive Committee, et. al. v.
Blackwell, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22539, *24 (N.D. Ohio 2004).
205
See PE O P L E FO R TH E AM E R I CA N WA Y E T A L., EL E C T IO N PR O T E C TI O N 2004,
SH A T T E R I N G T H E MY T H : AN IN I T I A L SN A P S H O T O F VO TER DI S E N F R A N C H I S E M E N T IN T H E 2004
EL E C T IO N S 7 (Dec. 2004).
47