Maryland

Supreme Court hearing Maryland Redistricting Case is not “Frivolous” for Future of Election Law Procedure

Election Law Society · October 23, 2015 ·

By: Hayley A Steffen

The Supreme Court has famously asserted that the right to vote is “preservative of other basic civil and political rights.” Recognizing the right to vote is implicated in election law litigation, Congress enacted special procedures for adjudicating these claims under the Three-Judge Act of 1910. Now codified under 28 U.S.C. § 2284, one provision requires a three-judge district court to hear constitutional challenges to redistricting claims of any congressional or statewide legislative body. Although the statute reads that the single judge to whom the request for a three-judge panel is made “may determine that a panel is not necessary,” it is unclear under what standard the judge has the authority to do so. Next month, the Supreme Court will be called upon to clarify this standard in a case brought by a Maryland man challenging the state’s redistricting scheme.

Vote-Flipping in Maryland: The Consequence of Voting with Dinosaurs

Election Law Society · December 1, 2014 ·

By Caitlin Whalan

The gubernatorial race in Maryland, the notoriously blue state, was tighter than anticipated. Larry Hogan, the Republican nominee, narrowly beat out the Democratic candidate, Lieutenant Governor Anthony Brown. Now that the dust is beginning to settle from the shocking upset, a new issue is creeping into the forefront: faulty voting machines. [Read more…] about Vote-Flipping in Maryland: The Consequence of Voting with Dinosaurs

A Balancing Act: Maryland’s Online Ballot Marking Tool – An Improvement for Disabled Voters or a Threat to Election Integrity?

Election Law Society · October 26, 2014 ·

By Caitlin Whalan

On Election Day, a voter arrives at her designated polling place, the elementary school located a few miles from her home. Her husband helps her from the car and escorts her in, where there are lines of people anxiously waiting to cast their vote. Upon her arrival, she requests a voting machine with non-visual access. After waiting an hour and a half, a voting machine with non-visual access is finally available, and it is now her turn to vote. She slowly makes her way to the voting machine, using her cane to guide her. Once she is in front of the voting machine, the audio prompts begin, but the words get lost in the background noise, ricocheting from the bare gymnasium floor. She strains to hear the audio prompts emanating from the voting machine. She calls out for a poll worker to help replay the audio prompts. The poll worker comes over to her, but the poll worker is not well trained in accessibility features of the voting machine. After a few tries, he is able to replay the audio prompts, but cannot make them any louder. This time, she concentrates harder, trying to grasp every word of the audio prompt. Still, the noises of gymnasium roar like a freight train in the background. After another strained attempt, she finally completes her ballot, but leaves the gymnasium frustrated and unsure if she cast her vote the way she intended. [Read more…] about A Balancing Act: Maryland’s Online Ballot Marking Tool – An Improvement for Disabled Voters or a Threat to Election Integrity?

Mental Disability and the Vote

Election Law Society · January 31, 2014 ·

by Andy Howard

People in our culture are accustomed to analogizing poor voting decisions with mental disabilities. Who among us hasn’t called people “crazy” when they vote in ways with which we disagree? This sorry attitude, though, is a reflection of our culture’s stigma against people with mental disabilities. People with cognitive disabilities are frequently seen as a class that does not enjoy the same freedoms as others, including that of suffrage. Do we, as a society, really feel that people with disabilities don’t have an interest in the public policies propounded by our government? [Read more…] about Mental Disability and the Vote

Be careful what you wish for: MD’s centralized voter registration too efficient?

Election Law Society · April 16, 2013 ·

by Anna Killius, Contributor

So much can go wrong before a voter ever reaches the voting booth. Voters encounter registration requirements, polling place assignments and identification law confusion. On Election Day, long lines and chilly temperatures can test the fortitude of even the most dedicated citizens. But imagine waiting for hours and dutifully handing over your driver’s license and voter registration card, only to be told that you are missing from the poll books. According to the Maryland State Board of Elections, you no longer live at your address, and your precinct has been changed. This is precisely what Christopher Lochner faced when he arrived at the Hereford polling station on November 6th, and he may not have been alone. With Maryland’s centralized voter registration system, it is now easier for voters to inadvertently signal a change of address, potentially leaving displaced and disgruntled voters to cast provisional ballots.

Centralized, computerized systems are a relatively recent addition to the election process, but, for Maryland, the idea is nothing new. After the 1994 gubernatorial election was decided by less than 6,000 votes, Governor Glendening created a 13-member task force to investigate and suggest reforms for the Maryland election system. Among those suggestions was a centralized state registration roll to replace those individually maintained by the counties. Budget constraints prevented Maryland from acting on this ambitious plan until Congress passed the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) of 2002. [Read more…] about Be careful what you wish for: MD’s centralized voter registration too efficient?