Courts & Law

Please see the Election Integrity Homepage for complete coverage and the latest news.

Judge Michael Miller, in a carefully reasoned and balanced opinion, today ordered the release of the final MDB and GBF database files for the 2006 RTA election primary and general elections. The judge denied without prejudice access to every MDB and GBF file for the 2006 elections, which would include the RTA election, until and unless the plaintiffs can address remaining security concerns which might arise from that larger release.

For background and commentary on the case and why it is critical to election integrity, please see my earlier posts cataloged on the trial’s home post.

The immediate goal of the Democratic party – to be able to look closer at the final election databases – is satisfied by the ruling. But the broader goal of being able to look at a time series of backups for discrepancies or discontinuities that could indicate manipulation of the RTA election specifically is stymied for the moment. John Denker has some very useful additional commentary on the judge’s apparent strategy.

It is still unclear whether the judge will grant on-going injunctive relief to turn over the final database files from every election going forward. The denial of access to the entire series of database files indicates that the court may still need to be satisfied as to any remaining concerns about security resulting from on-going and multiple disclosures of this type of data before granting such an injunction.

The ruling will allow the Democratic party to perform the forensic analysis required to search for any evidence of wrong-doing. It will also allow the experts for the Democratic party to begin to more closely address the unquantified and unspecified potential security threats from the public disclosure of the data in these files claimed by the County. This access will be crucial in satisfying the court that there is little or no practical threat to elections integrity posed by this information being in the public domain. Once that task is
complete, broader public access to these files (the entire backup history of the election and that of future elections) can be secured.

There is no doubt that the factual findings of the court and this ruling are an resounding and unqualified victory for transparency in our elections process. However, there are further battles that must be fought: to access the entire time-series of backup database files, and to gain permanent injunctive access to the files of future elections without having to litigate each time.

As I digest the ruling and get feedback from the principals in the case, I will continue to update this post.

Here is Judge Miller’s ruling in PDF format: Download MillerRuling.pdf

UPDATE:

Having had a chance to digest the ruling fully and consult with Bill Risner, I have a few additional comments.

The bottom line is that the public will get access to the final databases in the 2006 RTA election primary and general elections and all future elections, though the timing of future releases remains indeterminate.

The possibility for getting all database versions throughout the election process remains open pending further demonstration that there is no security issue. To my mind, the judge has adopted the County’s burden shifting standards of ‘plausible’ or ‘possible’ security harms, when the legal standard requires that the County demonstrate a specific probable harm attendant to the release of a public record. However, I don’t think this final reservation will long stand in light of the factual findings the court announced in this ruling.

A question that comes up often is whether this ruling will be appealed by the Board of Supervisors. I think there is really only one person who know that answer to that question: Chuck Huckelberry. My recommendation is that if you are concerned about his decision whether to appeal, you should call his office and let him know how you feel about that possibility.

Detailed analysis of Judge Miller’s Under Advisement Ruling after the flip…

UPDATE: VICTORY! Reid pulled the version with immunity. It will likely creep back on the calendar in January, but for now the beast is slain. If you aren’t sure what the fuss is about regarding granting immunity to telecoms for the assistance in the Administration’s past violations of FISA, then this is the video to … Read more

This post has been superseded by a new Homepage.

Latest News:

Judge Michael Miller has issued his ruling
granting the plaintiffs access to the final databases for the 2006
Primary and General elections, but denying without prejudice wider
access to all database files for the election in the possession of Pima
County until and unless they are able to demonstrate the wider access
will not compromise election security. This means that the mid-year RTA
election and the backups made during the multi-day process of counting
ballots remain out of reach for now.

The Board of Supervisors has put the release of limited files the court has ordered released on the agenda at their Jan. 8
meeting, which starts at 9 a.m. Board members are slated to discuss
whether they will give the files up, or of they will appeal the ruling. Interested parties may want to show up and have a say.

Complete trial coverage after the flip…

Please see the Election Integrity Homepage for complete coverage and the latest news. Bill Risner’s closing arguments for the Democrats: Click To Play The central theme of Democrats’ attorney Bill Risner throughout the trial was that the elections belong to the people, not the government. The people’s political parties have a legitimate role to play … Read more

Please see the Election Integrity Homepage for complete coverage and the latest news. I’m not entirely sure what the county’s purpose was in calling John, but they kept him dangling for days. I have to wonder if some of it was just a way to keep him out of the courtroom most of the time. … Read more