Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Samantha

(9,314 posts)
Sat Nov 9, 2013, 09:43 PM Nov 2013

A Spotlight on the Virginia AG contest through the lens of the Equal Protection Clause

Regarding the Attorney General election in Virginia, I have a question. Please keep in mind I do not live in Virginia and I know nothing about the rules outlined in the Commonwealth's Constitution.

It appears Fairfax County is applying a caveat to the authenticity of provisional ballots cast in that contest. One article I just read on this site refers to it as a "new" rule in which voters who did in fact cast provisional ballots must show up to authenticate the ballot if he or she wants it counted.

If Fairfax County applies this rule, and other counties in the Commonwealth did not, would that not be a violation of the Equal Protection Law? Did not in fact an attorney for George W. Bush* argue that it was "a violation of the Equal Protection Law if counties differed at all in how they interpreted the intent of a voter." That attorney was Barry Richards and this was reported by David Bois in his book "Courting Justice" at pages 423-424.

Additionally, in the Supreme Court, Bush's attorneys argued the Florida Supreme Court's decision violated 3 USC Section 5 "which gives conclusive effect to state court determinations only if those determinations are made 'pursuant to . . . laws enacted prior to' Election Day." (at page 440). And while the opinion of the majority did try to limit the application of this provision to that one decision when it ruled for George W. Bush*, we all remember Justice Stevens words in his dissent and realize that without complete certainty as to the identity of the winner, the "loser is perfectly clear. It is the Nation's confidence ... of the rule of law." See page 450 of "Courting Justice."

NBC News has reported that this rule that voters who cast provisional ballots must personally contact their local Boards of Election in order to have their votes counted. Again, NBC News has also stated that:

"The attorney general is essentially the CEO of the state government law office, supervising more than 400 lawyers and support staff. The position also is historically a stepping stone to a run for governor." I am sure we all know who that Attorney General is.

http://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/New-Absentee-Votes-Could-Swing-Va-AG-Race-to-Herring-231287821.html

There are just too many things that do not pass the smell test in this Absentee Ballot counting process. My hope is that the attorneys in Virginia and in the Department of Justice are carefully watching this process and that the people of Virginia STAND UP for the integrity of that process.

What do you think?

Sam

5 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
A Spotlight on the Virginia AG contest through the lens of the Equal Protection Clause (Original Post) Samantha Nov 2013 OP
Message auto-removed Name removed Nov 2013 #1
I don't have an answer to this, but. . . StrayKat Nov 2013 #2
I don't have the answer either but NBC reports it as a "new" rule Samantha Nov 2013 #3
I'm not sure. StrayKat Nov 2013 #4
I think the "new" rule will be challenged if the outcome is suspect Samantha Nov 2013 #5

Response to Samantha (Original post)

StrayKat

(570 posts)
2. I don't have an answer to this, but. . .
Sat Nov 9, 2013, 10:07 PM
Nov 2013

Someone who is involved with the election tweeted this:

Brian W. Schoeneman ?@BrianSchoeneman 5h

.@energydonk @notlarrysabato To be clear, this wasn't an SBE change - they believe this has always been their policy.

.@energydonk @notlarrysabato This was reminder guidance to localities. Not every locality had our past practice.

.@icanhasbailout @energydonk @notlarrysabato There's a legal disagreement over whether it was discretionary or not.

@icanhasbailout @energydonk @notlarrysabato I've already notified SBE we'll be seeking an AG opinion on it after the election.

https://twitter.com/BrianSchoeneman/status/399265036339662851

Samantha

(9,314 posts)
3. I don't have the answer either but NBC reports it as a "new" rule
Sat Nov 9, 2013, 10:14 PM
Nov 2013

Thanks for sharing that information. I do note that last bit refers to seeking an AG opinion on it after the election. I think a legitimate opinion will have to go beyond Cuccinelli's office, don't you?

Sam

StrayKat

(570 posts)
4. I'm not sure.
Sat Nov 9, 2013, 10:22 PM
Nov 2013

The State said before the election that it wasn't a conflict of interest for Cuccinelli to preside over an election that he was running in (*eye roll*), but made some mention of Cuccinelli recusing himself from investigating potential election violations. http://www.timesdispatch.com/news/latest-news/cuccinelli-no-conflict-for-ag-s-office-to-preside-over/article_0f3cde5c-3bf9-11e3-a2fc-0019bb30f31a.html

But, Cuccinelli has a history of ignoring big conflicts of interest. We'll see. . .

Samantha

(9,314 posts)
5. I think the "new" rule will be challenged if the outcome is suspect
Sun Nov 10, 2013, 12:21 AM
Nov 2013

I just don't understand how a Democrat could legitimately lose in Fairfax County.

Sam

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»A Spotlight on the Virgin...