http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/060130/phm029.html?.v=38
Press Release
Source: Lynn Landes
Monday January 30, 11:01 am ET
WASHINGTON, Jan. 30 /PRNewswire/ -- A little-noticed voting
rights lawsuit has made its way to the U.S. Supreme Court (Docket No. 05-930).
It constitutes the first legal challenge to the widespread use of
nontransparent voting systems. Specifically, the lawsuit challenges the use of
voting machines and absentee voting in elections for public office.
The lawsuit was originally filed by freelance journalist
Lynn Landes in July of 2004 in Philadelphia federal court (U.S. District Court
for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania). The Third Circuit Court of Appeals
ruled against Landes on November 2, 2005.
In her lawsuit Landes claims that, as a voter and a
journalist, she has the right to direct access to a physical ballot and to
observe the voting process unimpeded. Voting by machine or absentee, Landes
claims, introduces obstacles and concealment to a process that must be
accessible and transparent in a meaningful and effective manner.
Landes is representing herself in this action.
"I tried to get civil rights organizations interested
in this case, but had no luck. Their disregard for this issue is incredible.
It's clear to me that without direct access to a physical ballot and meaningful
transparency in the process, our elections have no integrity whatsoever,"
says Landes.
The defendants in the Landes lawsuit are Margaret
Tartaglione, Chair of the City Commissioners of Philadelphia; Pedro A. Cortes,
Secretary of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania; and Alberto Gonzales, Attorney
General of the United States.
Attorneys for the defendants have successfully fought
Landes, claiming that she did not prove an injury and therefore does not have
standing. Landes counters that she has the right to challenge the
constitutionality of acts of the legislative branch under federal statute and
case law, most significantly under Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137 (1803).
Early American history seems to favor the Landes position.
Prior to the Civil War, voting was a public and transparent process. It was
only after the war, as the elective franchise expanded to minorities and women,
three changes to state and federal election laws were adopted that eventually
made the voting process a private and nontransparent enterprise: absentee
voting was allowed (1870's), the Australian secret ballot method was adopted
(1880's), and voting machines were permitted by Congress (1899).
Today, 94.6% of all votes are processed by machines and
approximately 30% of all voting is conducted early or by absentee.
The defendants' response is due at the Supreme Court no
later than February 24, 2006. The Landes lawsuit can be found at the following
url: http://www.EcoTalk.org/lawsuit.doc.
EcoTalk.org
Lynn Landes,
publisher
215-629-3553
lynnlandes@earthlink.net
Source: Lynn Landes
Copyright © 2006 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.
Copyright © 2006 PR Newswire. All rights reserved.
FAIR USE NOTICE
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of political, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.