Thursday, August 03, 2006
Delaware fusion breakthrough.
Glitch keeps my client off the ballot.
Joell Palmer has been nominated by his party as the only opponent to incumbent John Day, for the 100th legislative seat.
However, the elections commission won't put him on the ballot, won't let him be a write-in candidate, won't let him vote, won't let him distribute 101 copies of literature, but will be happy to fine him thousands of dollars if he is late reporting that he continues to raise and spend no money.
Marion County, where he lives, won't let him vote, won't let him into the building where his provisional vote waits uncounted, won't let him attending supposedly public meetings under the open door law.
The county is also threatening to take his 1/8th acre tomato garden without just compensation, but that's another issue.
Joell Palmer does not consent to a search.
His right to not consent to a search has been upheld by the Supreme Court.
Edmond v Indianapolis.
Taken together, these restrictions amount to a severe burden on his rights of political participation. Norman v Reed.
The Anderson v Celebrezze standard is also relevant.
Glitch keeps my client off the ballot.
Joell Palmer has been nominated by his party as the only opponent to incumbent John Day, for the 100th legislative seat.
However, the elections commission won't put him on the ballot, won't let him be a write-in candidate, won't let him vote, won't let him distribute 101 copies of literature, but will be happy to fine him thousands of dollars if he is late reporting that he continues to raise and spend no money.
Marion County, where he lives, won't let him vote, won't let him into the building where his provisional vote waits uncounted, won't let him attending supposedly public meetings under the open door law.
The county is also threatening to take his 1/8th acre tomato garden without just compensation, but that's another issue.
Joell Palmer does not consent to a search.
His right to not consent to a search has been upheld by the Supreme Court.
Edmond v Indianapolis.
Taken together, these restrictions amount to a severe burden on his rights of political participation. Norman v Reed.
The Anderson v Celebrezze standard is also relevant.
Comments:
Post a Comment
