I thought it was the 6th CIrcuit.
This is a tough case. In any county with voter registration over 100% I can hope we all agree that we NEED observers there.
On the other hand it would be real easy to get out of hand and start trying to disqualify legitimate voters.
The Ohio GOP obviously planned their challenges well. They sent mailings to many addresses with new registrants. They now have a list of addresses which came back with a return to sender or whatever.
If they limit it to the list and keep thigns civil and polite, it will be a good thing to prevent voter fraud.
If they go overboard it could quickly become voter intimidation.
I expect it will end up doing both.
I think one idea is that they will use it to tie up the polling place and make people wait longer, thus turn some away. Also, the idea that a returned mail is grounds for a challege is baseless. The filing on behalf of the voters, by the dems or liberal groups, was well written on this. Sorry I don't have the link to the filing here and I don't know which of the cases it was from. I think the first once.
Also, is this federal or state courts? Is allowing challegers the same as allowing them to decide or allowing them to sit and take notes?
Finally, aren't two party reps already at each precint by state law and officials? Does this mean the parties want to place somebody "better" than the people the local officials or party might have chosen? I.e., they don't trust locals and want some overbearing outside lawyers to challenge or defend?
