Thanks to Richard Winger of Ballot Access News for this post.

The Plaintiffs, Four Registered Maine Voters who intend to Vote for Susan Collins in the 2020 Election, request that a United States District Court judge Issue an Order Invalidating Maine’s Ranked-Choice Voting System on Constitutional Grounds, in a Motion for Preliminary Injunction.

On August 14th, U.S. District Court Judge, Lance E. Walker, a Trump Appointee, Refused to Enjoin Maine from using Ranked-Choice Voting, Hagopian v Dunlap, 1:20cv-257.

Plaintiffs are hardly alone in their view toward ranked-choice voting. Critics warn that it is an ahistorical and gimmicky solution in search of a problem intended to advantage one party over another. Advocates promise that it will increase voter participation and remove some of the negativity from modern political campaigning. The debate about whether ranked-choice voting makes sense for Mainers as a method by which to choose their elected representatives is likely to continue for some time. My limited charge is to determine only whether the RCV Act is contrary to the text of the United States Constitution. It is not. As I stated following my first encounter with RCV litigation: “The remedy in a democracy, when no constitutional infirmity appears likely, is to exercise the protected rights of speech and association granted by the First Amendment to persuade one’s fellow citizens of the correctness of one’s position and to petition the political branch to change the law.” Baber, 349 F. Supp. 3d at 80. Defendants have persuaded me that Plaintiffs have not presented claims warranting the extraordinary and drastic remedy of a judicial order setting aside RCV in Maine. Plaintiffs’ Motion for Preliminary Injunction is DENIED.










NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote! Michael H. Drucker