votingA.jpg

The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Thursday denied a request from Northeast Ohio Coalition for the Homeless and others for a full bench review of a lawsuit challenging Ohio's absentee and provisional ballot rules.

(Marvin Fong, Plain Dealer/file photo)

COLUMBUS, Ohio -- Advocates for the homeless challenging Ohio's absentee and provisional ballot rules will consider taking their case to the U.S. Supreme Court.

The full 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals declined on Thursday to hear the case after a three-judge panel of the appeals court partially reversed the advocates' lower-court victory.

Last month, lawyers for the Northeast Ohio Coalition for the Homeless, the Columbus Coalition for the Homeless and the Ohio Democratic Party requested what is called an en banc hearing with the full court. They argued the appellate court decision was inconsistent and will create confusion for the November presidential election.

Attorney Subodh Chandra said the groups are considering an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.

"The [6th District] court has ensured that thousands of registered Ohio voters -- whose eligibility county elections boards do not question -- will be disenfranchised over trivial errors and omissions on ballot forms, like missing a zip code, writing a name in legible cursive rather than in block letters, etc," Chandra said in a statement.

What's the case?

The groups argued that a paid of 2014 laws adding requirements for absentee and provisional ballots unfairly disenfranchised minority voters and unconstitutionally burdened the right to vote. The law required all fields on absentee ballot envelopes to be complete; previously, they only had to be "sufficient."

U.S. District Court Judge Alegnon L. Marbley ruled in June that the rules had been applied inconsistently across the state and ballots from homeless, black and Latino voters were disqualified more than others.

In September, a three-judge panel from the 6th Circuit upheld Marbley's ruling as it applied to birth dates and addresses on absentee ballots, but reversed the rest.

For example, ballot envelopes with an incorrect Social Security number, a variation of a name such as "Bill" instead of "William," or cursive writing would have been counted under the lower court decision but are invalid under the appellate court decision.

Other details from the panel's decision:

As it stands, counties will handle absentee and provisional ballots inconsistently, meaning whether your vote counts could hinge on where you live.

The panel's ruling addressed some technical standards in the law - birth dates and addresses on the ballot forms - but didn't address other required standards.

Although the standards for absentee ballots are virtually identical to provisional ballots, the panel didn't reach the same ruling for each.

Attorneys for NEOCH asked Judge Alice Batchelder to recuse herself because her husband William was the presiding House Speaker when the laws, both Senate bills, were passed. He cosponsored one and voted for both. As she did during a 2015 case, Batchelder rejected the request.

"The homeless coalitions do not understand how a judge -- whose House-speaker husband the case accuses of leading racial discrimination, and constitutional and voting-rights violations -- can feel free to participate in a court decision denying voting rights, or how this is the impartial justice our system promises," Chandra said.



Early voting in Ohio starts Wednesday.