ILNews

Appeals filed in challenged mail-in ballot ruling

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The plaintiffs in a Marion County suit involving how challenged mail-in absentee ballots are counted have filed a verified appellate Rule 56(a) motion for the Indiana Supreme Court to accept jurisdiction over their appeal.

Raymond J. Schoettle, Erica Pugh, and the Marion County Republican Party filed the motion Oct. 31 after Marion Circuit Judge Theodore M. Sosin ordered in Raymond J. Schoettle, et al. v. Marion County Election Board, 49C01-0810-PL-049131, that the Marion County Election Board is to treat all challenged mail-in absentee votes as provisional ballots and set them aside for future resolution by the election board pursuant to Indiana Code Section 3-11.7. The order also required the election board to instruct all inspectors and precinct board members to follow the procedures outlined in the Indiana Election Day Handbook.

The Marion County Election Board filed an emergency motion for stay pending appeal Oct. 31 to the Indiana Court of Appeals, arguing the trial court's order is "internally contradictory" and "vague," so the election board can't be sure what it requires. The election board also argues the injunction requires it to use certain procedures relating to the counting of absentee ballots that violate Indiana law and the federal Help America Vote Act. They want the emergency stay because they say the injunction is unsupported by law and will require hundreds of poll workers to be retrained before Election Day.

Schoettle and other plaintiffs believe the Supreme Court should take the appeal because the Court of Appeals will effectively become the court of last resort because the courts are closed tomorrow in observance of Election Day. The plaintiffs argue if the election board doesn't have to comply with the trial court's mandate, then challenged ballots will be scanned into the ballot box on Election Day and there is no way to remove a ballot to determine its validity once it's been scanned. Also, if the election board isn't required to comply with Indiana law, its handling of challenged mail-in absentee ballots will differ from what every other Indiana county does, violating the mandate in Bush v. Gore, 531 U.S. 98 (2000).

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Based on several recent Indy Star articles, I would agree that being a case worker would be really hard. You would see the worst of humanity on a daily basis; and when things go wrong guess who gets blamed??!! Not biological parent!! Best of luck to those who entered that line of work.

  2. I was looking through some of your blog posts on this internet site and I conceive this web site is rattling informative ! Keep on posting . dfkcfdkdgbekdffe

  3. Don't believe me, listen to Pacino: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z6bC9w9cH-M

  4. Law school is social control the goal to produce a social product. As such it began after the Revolution and has nearly ruined us to this day: "“Scarcely any political question arises in the United States which is not resolved, sooner or later, into a judicial question. Hence all parties are obliged to borrow, in their daily controversies, the ideas, and even the language, peculiar to judicial proceedings. As most public men [i.e., politicians] are, or have been, legal practitioners, they introduce the customs and technicalities of their profession into the management of public affairs. The jury extends this habitude to all classes. The language of the law thus becomes, in some measure, a vulgar tongue; the spirit of the law, which is produced in the schools and courts of justice, gradually penetrates beyond their walls into the bosom of society, where it descends to the lowest classes, so that at last the whole people contract the habits and the tastes of the judicial magistrate.” ? Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America

  5. Attorney? Really? Or is it former attorney? Status with the Ind St Ct? Status with federal court, with SCOTUS? This is a legal newspaper, or should I look elsewhere?

ADVERTISEMENT