No. of Recommendations: 8
The order from the court was referenced on the link you referenced above. It's below the PDF of the original motion.
Heins' complaint states he received certification from Kurt Bahr to be a watcher on 10/22, he applied on 10/24 to be a watcher at the county's two early voting locations and was denied a day later. He made a request again on 10/26 which was denied on 10/27. Both denials from Bahr stated that watcher permissions only applied to formal Election Day, and the second denial seemed to tighten Bahr's claim that watcher rights only applied to ballot counting which only happens on election day.
Here's the applicable Missouri law:
https://law.justia.com/codes/missouri/title-ix/cha...------------------
115.409. Who may be admitted to polling place. — Except election authority personnel, election judges, watchers and challengers appointed pursuant to section 115.105 or 115.107, law enforcement officials at the request of election officials or in the line of duty, minor children under the age of eighteen accompanying an adult who is in the process of voting, international observers who have registered as such with the election authority, persons designated by the election authority to administer a simulated youth election for persons ineligible to vote because of their age, members of the news media who present identification satisfactory to the election judges and who are present only for the purpose of bona fide news coverage except as provided in subdivision (18) of section 115.637, provided that such coverage does not disclose how any voter cast the voter's ballot on any question or candidate or in the case of a primary election on which party ballot they voted or does not interfere with the general conduct of the election as determined by the election judges or election authority, and registered voters who are eligible to vote at the polling place, no person shall be admitted to a polling place.
------------------
This section doesn't define a polling place or distinguish between "day of" voting and early voting in terms of location. Bahr seems to be basing his denials on this section of state law governing watchers / challengers:
------------------
115.105. Challengers, how selected, qualifications — challenges, when made — challenges, how made. — 1. The chair of the county committee of each political party named on the ballot shall have the right to designate a challenger for each polling place, who may be present until all ballots are cast on the day of election, and a challenger for each location at which absentee ballots are counted, who may be present while the ballots are being prepared for counting and counted.
------------------
Note it references "day of election" and it references locations where absentee ballots are counted. By the modern standards of interpretation in the judicial branch of any semblance of proper English grammar, that language does NOT explicitly state the watcher process applies to EARLY VOTING not taking place on election day.
A different section 115.449 covering the COUNTING of ballots states that counting of PAPER ballots doesn't begin until after polls close which would further bolster a contention that the law is not clear on the presence of watchers at locations NOT involved with absentee ballot processing and overal vote COUNTING on election day.
A reasonable person, even someone like me not in favor of this poll watching posturing, would generally conclude the intent of these laws was to permit these watchers anywhere voting is taking place, not just on "the magic day." However, such a conclusion assumes reason and good faith upon the part of other public officials and partisan groups. Maybe Bahr is reading those statutes literally (as one might be normally prone to do with LAWS) and he concluded pre-voting doesn't count.
Curiously, Heins' motion makes this statement:
Missouri State Statute(s) is both clear and distinct, that a Watcher and/or Challenger may be present in a polling location where absentee ballots are being counted or being prepared for counting. Furthermore, the role of a Watcher / Challenger cannot be fulfilled while being denied access to polling locatioins where ballots are being processed. This will only serve to disenfranchise voters and cast doubt on the validity and security of our county elections.So in his own filing, Heins isn't correctly summarizing the applicable law correctly, either. He is making an argument that inadvertantly agrees with the logic Bahr used to deny him access. Heins reiterates the purpose of Watchers / Challengers as involving the monitoring of ABSENTEE ballot processing and vote COUNTING. Well, ABSENTEE BALLOTS aren't involved in early voting. These ballots are filled out by the voter and submitted into the same machines used on election day. There's no two-tier outer and inner magic envelopes to audit and no chance for the ballot to get lost between the voter's hand and the machine. The voter sticks their own ballot into the machine just like on election day. And no COUNTING of votes is currently taking place, only COLLECTION of ballots directly from the hand of validated voters.
WTH
