NY-20: Nate Silver Says 'No Apparent Path' To Tedisco Win

MONDAY: Tedisco's people continue the obstruction campaign (4.00 / 1)

Tedisco's attorneys were grasping at straws again this morning in Poughkeepsie. Check out this report at Politicker NY:

http://www.politickerny.com/31...

It's telling that the residency (non-) issue is such a settled matter of law that the Murphy folks didn't even feel it necessary to respond...

Not only are there countless court precedents to back up the challenged absentee voters, there is simply nothing in the election law that says that financial considerations such as rent-stabilization or STAR benefits can a factor in determining where one votes. (The latter argument is particularly ironic, because many of the challenged voters are more likely to pay property taxes upstate, where they own homes, than in NYC, where most people rent.)

In fact, the courts have plainly and repeatedly stated that someone who has multiple residences can pick any one of them as their voting place. So long as you don't register and vote in more than one place, you are entitled to exercise that right at the residence of your choosing. It need not be "primary." Indeed, imagine the chaos that would ensue if judges had to determine what constituted "primary" for voters.

On the earlier matter, Tedisco is reaping the bitter fruits of having filed his suit prematurely. By doing so before any votes were cast, rather than going through the normal election challenge procedures, he has completely upended and confused the process. Hence the need for him to go back and re-argue a ruling from his own hand-picked judge.

This all would be hilarious, if it weren't so offensive to the exercise of democracy. Our country can't afford to have every close election become the target of a pre-emptive lawsuit of the kind leveled by Tedisco. But it is likely to become S.O.P. for the G.O.P.

---

by: Hudson @ Mon Apr 20, 2009 at 18:24:45 PM UTC

Seems like Team Murphy is confident (4.00 / 1)

there was no reply brief to Tedisco's nonsense, which I take as a good sign that Murphy is operating from a strong position right now.  Judge Brands should rule later this week. And I think he also owes us a residency ruling...

I'm a lawyer, although not an election law lawyer.  Asking the court for a new decision has to be most amateur tactic I've ever heard of.  There's this little thing in the law called "stare decisis."  It's already been decided.  Tedisco's team is basically asking for another bite at the apple.  Our system doesn't work that way.

Further, I think Judge Brands has already given Tedisco another bite at the apple in a sense, by allowing for the verified filing last week.  Another judge who might not be so accomodating might have dismissed their entire suit because nobody but Tedisco has standing.  Instead, they were allowed to file a corrective motion--the one the Rag took at face value.

This whole lawsuit is already a travesty--let's see how deep Brands digs his hole.

---

by: Hudson Dan @ Mon Apr 20, 2009 at 19:07:07 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Any guesses on when (0.00 / 0)

the big fool actually congratulates the winner?  I'll say in the last week in June, when folks start going on vacation....

---

by: robinia @ Tue Apr 21, 2009 at 01:19:36 AM UTC