Diebold voting machines and 2006...

You know what CA's Repub SecState, Bruce McPherson, did? Said he was gonna hold a meeting open to the public to have comments on Diebolds. And what did he do? He set a tape recorder with a mic in an empty room for comments...with nobody there. And when people yelled, he sent two aides in. Which pissed everybody off. Thus...

THE QUESTION:

Is it possible to issue a restraining order that will prevent the CA SecState, McPherson, from certifiying the Diebold voting machines from being used in the 2006 election?

THE ANSWER:

A restraining order could perhaps be sought, but it would have to be based first on a formal civil action (on a complaint properly filed) that alleged all the reasons why the Diebold machines are untrustworthy, subject to unchecked voter fraud and manipulation by officials and others against them, and why simple "oversight" (of the kind usually used to monitor elections) would not be effective.

That suit would best be brought by some group with standing, such as one of the major parties (i.e., The Democratic Party) or the League of Women Voters or the like, but could be brought (a harder row) by concerned voters.

First step would be to talk to one or more politically active attorneys experienced in voters' rights litigation and see what they say about a class action of some kind to stop their use. In connection with a well-pleaded suit, a temporary restraining order (TRO) could be sought to prevent the use of the machines until the whole matter and all issues are fully litigated and ruled upon by the court. An imminent and irreperable damage would have to be pleaded to be successful.

My suggestion: talk first to local and state Democratic party people--what do their lawyers say about such an action? Then, if they are unresponsive or evasive, find out who has fought for civil rights of workers, minorities, etc. and see if you can talk to an attorney there and get some feedback. Good luck, and don't wait for someone else to do it.

Wrap...