Gavin Roselles, a write-in candidate for Sheriff of Powell County Sheriff in the November 4 election, received 1,142 write-in votes. However, election officials won’t credit him with 238 votes in which the voter only wrote the candidate’s surname on the ballot. In addition, Roselles was not credited with an unknown number of other ballots, in which the voter wrote him in but didn’t blacken the circle next to the write-in line.

Because the incumbent, the only candidate whose name was printed on the ballot, received 994 votes, the incumbent was declared the victor, despite the obvious intent of the majority to elect Roselles. See this story.

The Montana Secretary of State’s interpretation of Bush v Gore is deeply flawed. Bush v Gore said, “Having once granted the right to vote on equal terms, the state may not, by later arbitrary and disparate treatment, value one person’s vote over that of another.” Yet Montana has not treated all voters equally in this instance. Thanks to Mike Fellows for the link.

On November 17, the Marion County Election Board stipulated that two particular Indiana election laws are unconstitutional, and U.S. District Court Judge Sarah Evans Barker signed a Final Judgment that no one in the future may enforce code sections 3-14-1-2(a)(2) and (3).

In 2012, the plaintiff-candidate, Zachary Mulholland, was a candidate for State Representative in the Democratic primary for an Indianapolis seat. The party did not endorse him and had endorsed his only Democratic opponent. Mulholland still campaigned, hoping to win the May Democratic primary. But his campaign literature, which pictured President Obama, and the Democratic candidates for U.S. Senate, and the incumbent member of the U.S. House (Democrat Andre Carson), and himself, was confiscated.

The reason for the confiscation was section 3-14-1-2(a)(2), which says, “A person who prints on a slate during a primary election campaign the name or number of a candidate without the candidate’s written consent, commits a Class A misdemeanor.” Mulholland had not said or implied in his campaign literature that any of the other Democrats mentioned by him had endorsed him. But because the politicians shown in his campaign literature had not given him signed statements letting him use their names and pictures, he was guilty of a crime. He argued that the law violates the First Amendment, and the county stipulated that he is correct. See this story.

A similar law, 3-14-1-2(a)(3), was also enjoined. It says when the written permission to mention and show candidates is obtained, it must be filed with the county election board.

On November 19, a New Jersey state appeals court revived the lawsuit Rutgers University Student Assembly v Middlesex County Board of Elections. The case was filed in 2011 to overturn the New Jersey law that requires voter registration applications to be filed no later than 21 days before an election. See this story. The trial court had dismissed the case, but the appeals court remanded it and said the case is strong enough so that there should be a trial.