United States Ninth Circuit

Plaintiffs in a challenge to a gubernatorial recall election demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits of their equal protection claim that there is no rational basis for using, in some counties and not others, pre-scored punchcard voting systems that the California Secretary of State has decertified as "unacceptable".

Appellate Information

• Decided 09/15/2003
• Published 09/15/2003

Judges

• Before:  SCHROEDER, Chief Judge, KOZINSKI, O'SCANNLAIN, KLEINFELD, TASHIMA, SILVERMAN, GRABER, McKEOWN, GOULD, TALLMAN, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Ninth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Mark D. Rosenbaum (argued), Peter J. Eliasberg, Ben Wizner, Catherine Lhamon, Ranjana Natarajan, Danile P. Tokaji:  ACLU Foundation of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA;  Erwin Chemerinsky:  University of Southern California Law School, Los Angeles, CA;  Laurence Tribe (argued), Cambridge, Massachusetts, MA;  Jordan Budd, ACLU of San Diego & Imperial Counties, San Diego, CA;  Alan L. Schlosser and Margaret C. Crosby:  ACLU Foundation of Northern California, San Francisco, CA;  John C. Ulin and Jilana L. Miller, Heller Ehrman White & McAuliffe, LLP, Los Angeles, CA;  Neal Katyal, Washington, DC;  Thomas C. Goldstein, Goldstein & Howe, P.C., Washington, DC;  attorneys for Plaintiffs-Appellants.


• For Appellees:
  
• Bill Lockyer, Andrea L. Hoch, Louise R. Mauro, Kenneth R. Williams, Douglas J. Woods (argued), Susan R. Oie, Office of the Attorney General of California, Sacramento, CA;  attorneys for Defendant-Appellee., Charles P. Diamond (argued), Robert M. Schwartz, Robert C. Welsh, Victor H. Jih, Los Angeles, CA;  Charles H. Bell, Thomas W. Hitachk:  Bellow, McAndrews, Hitachk & Davidian LLP, Sacramento, CA;  attorneys for Intervenor-Appellee.