Daily Kos

View Story | 41 comments

  •  Joan cites a 2006 petition to SCOTUS. (2+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    chumley, god less force

    Appendix C in that petition is a judgement by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida.
    The judgement validated the Florida certification of iVotronic systems, even though they plainly and unnecessarily violate the clearly stated Florida standard.

    pdf Page 79 (Appendix C-39a)

    Thus, in the context of touchscreen voting machines, the "definite choice" standard entails determining whether the voter has made a definite selection rather than ascertaining a voter's intent, i.e., did a voter intend not to make a selection or did the voter unintentionally make a mistake in using the equipment. The Court finds that by pressing the button to cast his or her ballot on the touchscreen machines, the voter is making a definite selection. In warning the voter of an undervote and allowing for a review process before the ballot is cast, touchscreen machines provide sufficient safeguards to ensure that a voter's undervote is intentional. As a result, the ballot images printed during a manual recount pursuant to the Emergency Rule reflect a voter's choices under the statutory scheme adopted by the Florida legislature. [FN18]

View Story | 41 comments