PACE New Mexico and others join the Lopategui vs. Vigil-Giron lawsuit

[Wilms]

PACE New Mexico and others join Voting lawsuit

Friday, 13 January 2006, 1:54 pm

Press Release: Voter Action NM

PACE New Mexico and others join the Lopategui vs. Vigil-Giron lawsuit.

snip

January 11, 2006, Santa Fe- Six plaintiffs are to be added to the Lopategui vs. Vigil-Giron lawsuit in a motion to amend the complaint to be filed January 12, 2006. The lawsuit seeks to enjoin use of electronic voting systems responsible for inaccurate and unverifiable results in the last election and before.

The new plaintiffs are PACE New Mexico, Voter Action New Mexico, Linda Yardley from Taos Pueblo, Joyce Bartley of Albuquerque, Marilyn Ernest of Las Vegas, and Michael Withnall, also of Las Vegas.

Mr. Withnall is legally blind and joined the lawsuit due to his desire for equal access to verifiable voting. “As a visually impaired voter, I have always had difficulty with voting and am strongly in favor of paper ballots that voters like myself can mark and verify with a voter assist device. Only paper ballots are truly verifiable and auditable. I believe I should be entitled to the same access to verifiable voting as a non-visually impaired voter”.

snip

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/WO0601/S00123.htm


and this Update

WHAT: New Mexico District Court Hearing on defendants' motions to dismiss the complaint in Patricia Rosas Lopategui, et al. v. Rebecca Vigil-Giron, et al.

WHEN: Wednesday, January 18, 2006, 2:00 p.m.

WHERE: San Miguel County Courthouse, Suite 203, 500 West National, Las Vegas, New Mexico

BACKGROUND: In Lopategui v. Vigil-Giron, a diverse group of New Mexico voters seeks a permanent injunction against use of inaccurate and unreliable touchscreen voting machines that lack an auditable and voter verifiable paper ballot. The defendants are the Secretary of State and 11 county clerks, all sued in their official capacities. The lawsuit was filed in January, 2005. In December, 2005, plaintiffs also filed a motion seeking a preliminary injunction to prevent the Secretary of State from buying over 800 more of these machines, as she had planned to do that month. The Secretary of State has agreed not to make the purchases, pending the court's decision on the motion for preliminary injunction.

PURPOSE OF COURT HEARING: At the hearing on January 18th, Judge Eugenio Mathis will hear oral arguments on whether to grant motions filed by the defendants, asking the court to dismiss the complaint. Plaintiffs will ask the court to deny the motions and allow them to continue with the discovery of evidence and preparations for trial. If the court denies the motions to dismiss, attorneys for the plaintiffs and for the Secretary of State will ask the court to set a schedule for deciding plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction to block purchase of more touch screen voting machines.

This important hearing is open to members of the public, who are invited to attend.

snip

http://www.voteraction.org

[Stevepol]

1. All of these court challenges are tremendously important!!

The more court challenges, the more the media will be forced to attend to it, and I noticed that Richardson is now I believe coming out in favor of verified voting. As John Gideon observed, "It's amazing what a lawsuit can do to frame your thinking."

There need to be more and more of these around the country. It would be better if the government, acting out of its wisdom and desire to protect democracy, would pass laws and just in general act like it was a government of and for the people. Since that can't happen as long as this gang of thugs and criminals and Repub apologists and good ole boy Dems are in charge, the only way to effect any change is thru these court actions one by one over the country.