Updated 11/19/15: see further below, after essay.
In the year 2000 the U.S. Supreme Court ruled, in Bush v. Gore, that different standards of counting for the same office were a violation of the U.S.C.'s 14th Amendment, particularly the Equal Protection clause. I will rely on this case law to scuttle Washington's practice of having a single election for two different terms, regardless if one of the terms is shortened for good reason. Although, the "different standards of counting" will have a broader context in this case as opposed to the narrower context of how different counties within a state tabulate votes that Bush v. Gore focused on.
It's obvious that terms in Washington are usually decided by voters one at a time, so to have the occasional one election for two separate terms is a different standard for electing public officials, especially when other officials/candidates for the same jurisdiction are being elected by the usual "one term, one election" standard on the very same ballot. Washington could have avoided this probable conflict with the Constitution by simply putting the short term and the regular term on the same ballot as separate elections. I think this argument will be my best hope to have a new election for the regular term, if not both terms, but I will be using at least one of the other 2 arguments that I wrote about as a secondary argument before the Court, which may help with getting a recount if nothing else.
Update (November 19, '15): Pro Bono: If any lawyer would like to help me with this case, please E-mail me as soon as possible. Need a lawyer or lawyers before or after the case has been officially filed, which is very likely to be on Monday, Nov. 23rd. Thank you.
Comments