Emergency Filing in VI Supreme Court last night re Voter Suppression

According to yesterday's Daily News a meeting of the Board of Elections has already been scheduled for today to address the issue:

http://virginislandsdailynews.com/news/joint-board-considers-letting-voters-scan-their-own-ballots-in-gubernatorial-runoff-election-1.1786852

I believe the Board's reconsideration of its position was scheduled after the expedited letter briefs in this proceeding. (See history referenced in the motion.) Apparently the Board's opposition brief would not concede that the tabulators had to be utilized in the runoff. I believe the emergency motion is to attempt to "nudge" the Board in the correct direction.

I believe the Board's reconsideration of its position was scheduled after the expedited letter briefs in this proceeding. (See history referenced in the motion.) Apparently the Board's opposition brief would not concede that the tabulators had to be utilized in the runoff. I believe the emergency motion is to attempt to "nudge" the Board in the correct direction.

Who pays for all these back and forth motions? Likely a stupid question ...

From the emergency motion filed: "The Board of Election’s conduct is evocative of the term “runaway train.”"

Love it!

We can all agree the the BOE has performed abysmally and that major changes are needed.

However, this lawsuit by MAPP and SARAUW is not being brought forth due to concerns for the voting public but rather Mapp' s own case of sour grapes over not having a majority win, for the 3rd time
in his runs for governor and facing a runoff. IMO.

That is not in any way a foolish question. The government boards are represented by government lawyers:

Vincent F. Frazer, Esq., Attorney General
Bernard Van Sluytman, Esq., Solicitor General
Kimberly L. Salisbury

The litigants pay their own attorney. If it is litigation for the campaign, it can be paid out of campaign funds -- although I know that a number of lawyers in the VI donate time to election issues on a pro bono basis. I do not know about Attorney Griffiths.

--Off Topic--

Just as an (interesting?) aside here, many VI residents do not know that all USVI lawyers are "encouraged" to provide pro bono representation -- and required to accept appointments to represent clients who cannot afford criminal or family court representation. This is done at a VERY reduced rate which many of us never actually claim/collect from the government. (Like many others, in more than 25 years of practice, I have never actually claimed the fees.) I have had two such appointments this year. Lawyers also represent many other such causes -- environmental issues, small businesses, etc. on a pro bono basis.

Yawn...

Perhaps, one can always ascribe some self-interest to any politician (;}).....but I believe you will find that both campaigns for Governor have strongly supported anti-voter suppression measures throughout the campaign -- and that these efforts before the VI Supreme Court were ongoing prior to either side knowing the voting results. I also know that other candidates have filed various actions and motions to assure that all voters have a chance to vote. I also believe that you will find that Donna's campaign has voiced its support for this as well.

Finally, I would say that the VI Supreme Court has shown unusual patience and great responsiveness in dealing with election issues. My view is that both sides and the Courts want voters to feel the system works well. No doubt there have been odd events, and maybe more this year than one would desire -- but I practice in other jurisdictions as well and suggest that the USVI is neither that unusual or that bad in its election litigation and voting issues.

Yawn...

I KNOW !! Don't you just HATE it when facts and information get in the way of conspiracy theories and DRAMA !!!!!

Sorry !

Carl

Thank you, CarlHartmann, for keeping us informed and for educating me on this latest issue.

Since there are so many allegations of corrupt judges, why now run to the courts to "protect the rights of the voters?" Has Mapp ever won a lawsuit?????

Since there are so many allegations of corrupt judges, why now run to the courts

I could not disagree more. I have practiced here since the 80's. I know many of the judges personally and have practiced before most of them. As I said, I have also litigated cases including public corruption, civil rights and death penalty cases in many other jurisdictions -- including big ones like New York City and DC. I would put many of our judges up against the judges there both for ability and integrity. I think it is unfortunate that no matter what side we are on these days the other side is always either demonized or corrupt.

MANY, many, many times what the public sees as a partisan decision has NOTHING to do with the underlying politics. For instance, in this election cycle the VI Supreme Court and US District Court "disagreement" about the Hansen case had MUCH more to do with a jurisdictional dispute between the two courts that has been on its way since 1991 than it has to do with Hansen. Google the Estate Thomas Mall case to see the first volley in that. This was just the USVI's version of Marbury v. Madison.

These men and women take reduced salaries (compared to the private bar) to do endless, thankless work on cases that are almost impossible -- and do so with WAY less money than the Courts need to run. One judge who was absolutely top of the line as a litigator and later judge committed suicide while on the bench. No offense, but I suspect that being a judge in Family or Criminal divisions would immobilize you and send you home crying every night.

[ [ [ UPDATE 11:30 am Thurs ] ] ]

Donna's campaign has entered an appearance in this case and is joining in the motion.

So perhaps the more cynical views are wrong, and both sides not only agree that voter suppression is bad -- but that they both want the Board to do the right thing!

Board's move !

I can't vote because I'm a Canadian but I just find "system" here in the VI such a complete farce. I baffles me how this nonsense can be tolerated election after election. It is very entertaining though!

Yup. Everything is worse in the VI..........I know that things in Canada, DC and Florida run MUCH, much better !!

By the way...do you think the mayor of Toronto (Canada) did more crack than the Mayor of DC? And how do you think the next election count in Florida will be in 2016

Of course I meant no disrespect Carl...but they can count 4 million ballots before midnight after an election in Toronto or any other big city, province, state or what have you.

Mayor Ford was a laughing stock but his real issue was alcohol. Crack was just a side addiction!

No problem ! Sorry!.......That was just too good to pass up.

If they use the machines....the results will be really fast.
Which brings us full circle.

CHRISTENSEN MOTION TO INTERVENE AND JOIN IN EMERGENCY MOTION

Comes now Donna Christensen, by counsel, and hereby moves to intervene in the above captioned appeal for the limited purpose of joining in the “Plaintiffs’ Motion For Emergency Relief” filed on November 12, 2014. In this regard, the Appellants have requested this Court to direct the Appellees in their official capacity as the persons entrusted with conducting elections in the Virgin Islands to use the DS200 Electronic Voting System in the upcoming run-off elections set for November 18, 2014, as required by law.

This request to intervene is filed pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 23 as an Amicus Curiae pleading as counsel could not locate another rule regarding motions to intervene. It is respectfully noted that Rule 23 requires leave of this Court, as the emergency basis of this request does not allow sufficient time to seek the permission of the other parties, who are all currently tied up in the on-going vote counting process.

Upon review of the facts asserted in Appellants’ motion regarding the lack of any risk of “over-voting” as well as a review of the applicable law requiring the use of such electronic machines, Donna Christensen seeks to intervene to join in said Emergency Request to direct the Appellees to use the DS200 electronic voting machines in the run-off election set for Tuesday, November 18, 2014.

The citizens of the Virgin Islands and the voters who will participate in the upcoming election all deserve clarity and integrity in the election process. It is respectfully submitted that under the circumstances that currently exist with only two candidates in the run-off election, the relief sought should be granted.

I thought it had already been determined by BOE that voters could scan in runoff. Only two choices so this is a no brainer. Again more drama for nothing.

Nope...they haven't agreed yet (unless today's scheduled meeting has adjourned and they announced it in the past few minutes.) Nor have they filed with the Supreme Court stating that they agree.

Agree...it should be a no-brainer.

As to this being more drama.....could not possibly agree more.....It would just be better if we use the machines and avoid even more drama.

But look at the bright side...you have both campaigns' briefs (the most recent of which was filed in the past hour or two) totally agreeing on at least one thing. Let's sing "Kumbaya."

I think the BOE erred in not posting video of how DS200 processed symbol ballots that had votes not on the party. A picture is worth a thousand words, and some videos are worth a million.

Is there a PR (public relations) professional in the VI? If so, somebody needs to clearly explain on behalf of the voting process in the VI the limitations and benefits of all voting methods because the "news" sources in print and online are not asking any questions.

The BOE is losing the PR war, and the credibility war due to lack of adequate PR.

Several news articles have explained the issue with the DS200 scanners. Here's one:

http://stcroixsource.com/content/news/local-news/2014/10/31/elections-coordinator-resigns-us-attorney-appoints-complaints-ove

"Elections Coordinator Resigns; U.S. Attorney Appoints Complaints Overseer
...
In a test run, however, in which a voter selected the party symbol and then voted for candidates outside the party, the DS200 voided the party candidates in the categories where candidates outside of the party were also selected, which is how some board members and board counsel Kim Salisbury initially understood the machines would work. Instead of kicking out the ballot, the DS200 accepted it without informing the voter that votes had been deleted."

Edited to add: Note that this problem applied mainly during the general election. For the primary, the problem did not apply and the scanners were used. For the runoff, this problem should not apply and they will probably use the scanners.

For the runoff, this problem should not apply and they will probably use the scanners.

(Emphasis added.)

I think that is what has everyone perplexed and why Mapp's campaign filed (and Christensen's joined in) the motion. It seems to be what Ms411 called a 'no brainer.'

Why would they not just say "yes" and be done with it if it was the party symbol issue? Why would they not simply state in their Supreme Court brief that they WOULD use the machines, and put an end to it? And why do they need to have a meeting to discuss anything?

I guess my point in beginning this thread is that neither candidate is "behind" this. Nobody seems to be part of a conspiracy or plot. It seems to be some sort of inexplicable momentum or bureaucratic inertia. And if you follow the court case and the actual briefs you can see good folks trying to make the system work and work better. That's why I think Ken filed the case in the first place and why both camps seem to be on the side of the angels.

I don't think the BOE are crooks, lazy or corrupt. I don't think there is a cabal secretly running the VI. I think the judges and officials are trying their best in a difficult situation. That said -- it is important to the USVI that the elections not only are fair, but that they are seen and believed to be fair. Same with the courts. So let's just have a clear BOE statement that the machines will be used and then move on to the next drama.

I think both St Thomas and St Croix boards have to vote to use machines and majority will rule. Votes from recorded minutes protect both board and voters from allegations of fraud. Hopefully today's meeting resolved some of these issues.

http://m.virginislandsdailynews.com/news/st-thomas-elections-voters-will-be-allowed-to-scan-their-own-ballots-for-runoff-1.1787418

This Daily News article states that the voters would be allowed to use the machines and scan their votes. This was in yesterday's edition.

Just out of curiosity, is the 50% plus 1 valid for the run-off election to win or is it whomever gets the majority of votes, at this point?

What would happen if neither candidate met the 50% plus 1
threshold?