Seminole reliefRemedy is authorized under 102.168 The relief which may be granted in a contest is as follows:
"8) The circuit judge to whom the contest is presented may fashion such orders as he or she deems necessary to ensure that each allegation in the complaint is investigated, examined, or checked, to prevent or correct any alleged wrong, and to provide any relief appropriate under such circumstances."
Guiding principles in our remedies:
Why "doing nothing" is NOT an option
Is that a statute that you'd feel comfortable adding to the law??! If both the voter and the election officials don't comply with the law, then your privilege to vote will be in full force? Do you think that's what the legislature had in mind?
More background information
1. The depositions just made available provide clear evidence of *intentional* fraud: Many of the 2,126 voter ID numbers that GOP operative Michael Leach illegally added to GOP absentee ballot requests proved to be incorrect. Elections office staff members stated under oath that supervisor Goard instructed them to accept all request forms filled in by Leach whether the voter ID number was correct or incorrect. In contrast, trial testimony established that Goard had repeatedly and publicly stated her policy that no absentee ballot request would be accepted without the voter ID filled in by the voter, family member or guardian as required by Florida law.
2. The remedy is just and has good precedent for being upheld on appeal: Great precedent for an appellate court victory comes from Roe v. Alabama, a case spawned by a post-election dispute in 1994. Republican Perry Hooper appeared to have defeated incumbent Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Sonny Hornsby by 262 votes. At issue were about 2,000 absentee ballots that hadn't been opened, and were deemed illegal, because they lacked witnesses, notaries, or other requirements. Hornsby wanted them counted and both sides assumed that that if the ballots were counted it would lead to a Hornsby victory. A state judge in Montgomery ordered that the non-complying absentee ballot envelopes be opened and counted. Hooper, joined by Mobile Republican activist Larry Roe, filed suit in federal court, seeking to prevent the counting of the ballots. Their lawyers argued that if the 2,000 ballots were counted, it would violate the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment by treating one group of voters - those with the faulty ballots - differently than other citizens.
The 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals (Alabama, Georgia and Florida) agreed. It ruled that under state law, those votes didn't qualify. Counting the non-complying ballots would "dilute the votes of those voters who met the requirements" and "have the effect of disenfranchising those who would have voted but for the inconvenience imposed by the notarization/witness requirement." As a result the votes weren't counted, and Hooper became chief justice. The central finding was that by allowing people with incomplete and therefore illegal ballot requests to receive ballots and to then vote violated the 14th amendment rights of voters who complied with the law, as well as those who might have voted had they not had to follow Florida's strict requirements for making absentee ballot requests.