CA: Voters File To Halt Use Of Elec Voting Machines In Time For Nov Elec

[kpete]

California Voters File To Halt Use of Electronic Voting Machines
By VoterAction
August 08, 2006
Hearing to take place in time for November election

California voters challenging the use of Diebold touch screen voting systems today filed a motion for preliminary injunction in San Francisco Superior Court, asking the Court to prohibit purchase or use in California of Diebold Accuvote TSx electronic voting machines for use in the November 2006 general election. A hearing on the motion for preliminary injunction is expected on August 31, 2006. Defendants in the case are Secretary of State Bruce McPherson and elections officials in 11 California counties. Elections officials in eight other California counties have been dismissed from the suit, after they signed affidavits that they will not use Diebold touch screens for the November elections.

"This case will be the first time the California Courts have looked at the evidence on the myriad defects of this touch screen electronic voting system, and its failure to satisfy state law for election security. If the California voter plaintiffs win, the Secretary must immediately decertify
the problem-plagued machines, and counties will still have time to find an alternative for use in the November election," said John Eichhorst, co-counsel for the plaintiffs, and a partner at the law firm of Howard, Rice, Nemerovski, Canady, Falk & Rabkin in San Francisco.

"This case is a powerful and well-documented challenge to the Secretary of State's certification of the Diebold touch screen machines, which is illegal because they cannot be made secure, reliable, or verifiable. Unless the Court acts to prevent it, we are headed for a train wreck in the November election," said Lowell Finley, co-counsel for the plaintiffs and co-director
of Voter Action.

The lawsuit, Joseph Holder v. McPherson, et al., No. CPF 06-506171, was originally filed on March 21, 2006. In April, the Secretary of State and counties attempted unsuccessfully to have the case transferred permanently to federal court. United States District Court Judge Saundra Brown Armstrong in Oakland ruled on July 18, 2006 that this "removal" of the case from the state court was "legally improper" and remanded the case to state court.

more at:
http://www.votetrustusa.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1646&Itemid=113

[AX10]

1. k&r

[EFerrari]

2. Awesome!

:woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo:

[Reckon]

3. It should be done all across the country.

[mom cat]

4. Amen to that!

:bounce: