Logo-choiceSaveOurVotes logo
.

RESOURCES
Press releases
News
Reports & Studies
Costs of VVPAT
Legislation
Board of Elections
  Documents
Litigation Documents
Maryland Voting Info
Other groups
Home

GET  INVOLVED
Take Action
Grassroots Tools
About us
Sign up for our free
 discussion/newsgroup
 SAVEourVotes


       


2004 Lawsuit Against Maryland’s Paperless Electronic Voting System

From the time Maryland decided to move to a statewide paperless electronic voting system, questions were raised about the security of this method of voting. Two separate studies conducted by the state (see SAIC and RABA reports) confirmed numerous serious security risks of the new voting system.

On April 21, 2004, a cross-partisan group of Maryland voters filed a lawsuit against the Maryland State Board of Elections and its Administrator, Linda H. Lamone, charging that the Diebold AccuVote-TS electronic voting machines Maryland had recently purchased failed to comply with both state and federal law.


 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR ANNE ARUNDEL COUNTY

Plaintiffs: LINDA SCHADE, ANDREW HARRIS, JUDITH BURNS, MARK ELRICH, KWAME ABAYOMI, TERRENCE FITZGERALD, SHARON BEARD, and PAUL SUH

vs.

Defendants: MARYLAND STATE BOARD OF ELECTIONS,
LINDA H. LAMONE (in her capacity as Supervisor of Maryland’s State Board of Elections),

This case is brought on behalf of registered Maryland voters and candidates for public office to ensure the integrity of the November 2004 elections, and to preserve public trust and confidence in the system by which Maryland voters will elect the next President of the United States. Specifically, Plaintiffs bring this action against the Maryland State Board of Elections and its Administrator, Linda H. Lamone, for improperly certifying the Diebold AccuVote-TS electronic voting machines used in Maryland, and then failing to either correct or decertify the machines -- as required by state and federal law -- once it became clear that the machines could neither preserve the security and reliability of the November 2004 election nor create a voter verified paper audit trail. This suit is filed now, well in advance of the November 2004 election, to make sure that Maryland, which lies at the epicenter of the nationwide electronic voting machine controversy, does not become the next Florida.


June 25, 2004: MOTION FOR INJUNCTION TO PROTECT THE NOVEMBER 2004 ELECTION

Plaintiffs in the lawsuit filed a motion for a preliminary injunction to preserve the integrity of the November 2004 elections and restore public trust and confidence in the system by which Maryland voters will help elect the next President of the United States. The Maryland State Board of Elections and its Administrator, Linda H. Lamone, purchased and certified the Diebold AccuVote TS electronic voting system deployed in Maryland over the objections of its own Procurement Review Committee, and then failed to either fix or decertify the machines as required by state and federal law once numerous independent expert reports commissioned by the state of Maryland - as well as reports of widespread problems in actual elections in Maryland and nationwide - confirmed that the machines could not preserve the security and reliability of the upcoming November 2004 election.

August 9, 2004: FILING OF PETITIONS

Lawyers from Kirkland & Ellis LLP representing eight plaintiffs in Linda Schade vs. Linda Lamone and the Maryland State Board of Elections filed petitions with the Maryland Court of Appeals seeking to force the Elections Board to either fix or decertify the controversial Diebold electronic voting systems as required by Maryland state law.

More than a half-dozen national public interest groups, including Electronic Frontier Foundation, Common Cause, American Families United, Verified Voting and many others, filed an amicus brief in support of the plaintiffs’ petitions, indicating the significance of this landmark case in the growing national turmoil over electronic touch screen voting systems.

August 25 - 27, 2004: COURT HEARING ON MOTION FOR INJUNCTION

Transcripts for each of the three days of the trial hearing for a preliminary injunction:

Judge Manck issued a ruling [PDF 340K] on Septemeber 1, 2004, denying Maryland voters the option of paper ballots in the November election and relieving election officials of the requirement to implement basic security measures sought by the state's own experts.

An analysis of the decision by Cindy Cohn of the Electronic Frontier Foundation:
"A judge in Maryland on Tuesday issued a ruling [PDF] denying a request that Maryland voters be offered the option to vote on paper in the November election and that election officials implement basic security measures sought by the state's own experts. It's a very bad decision, and the court had to ignore two esteemed security experts and embrace some pretty outrageous falsehoods to do it."

September 14, 2004: EMERGENCY APPEAL OF RULING AGAINST INJUNCTION

On September 3, 2004, the court ordered [PDF 21K] an emergency appeal to be held on September 14, 2004.

The Petitioner's Brief [PDF 3MB] for the emergency appeal provides detailed arguments for the plaintiffs' position that the Circuit Court's decision is in error.

March 9, 2007: DEPOSITION OF STATE ELECTIONS ADMINISTRATOR LINDA LAMONE

Linda Lamone was deposed in her capacity as State Elections Administrator as part of the ongoing lawsuit against her. The deposition is broken up into smaller documents for easier review. The page numbers refer to the pages of the testimony included in that section.
Lamone Deposition part 1 (pages 1-41)
Lamone Deposition part 2 (pages 42-85)
Lamone Deposition part 3 (pages 86-129)
Lamone Deposition part 4 (pages 130-173)
Lamone Deposition part 5 (pages 174-217)
Lamone Deposition part 6 (pages 218-261)
Lamone Deposition part 7 (pages 262-305)

A few sections that may be of particular interest:

  • Page 42: Initial Procurement Process
  • Page 106: SAIC Report
  • Page 130: Paper Receipts and a false sense of security
  • Page 170: Chris Hood (Diebold whistleblower)
  • Page 190: Changes to the Diebold source code
  • Page 199: Waiver of ITA certification
  • Page 218: Voting System Guidelines
  • Page 234: Dr. Shamos
  • Page 249: Ballot Images not Ballots

August 24, 2007: APPEALS COURT RULING

Maryland Court of Appeals ruling upholding the denial of the motion for a preliminary injunction by the Circuit Court in August of 2004.

CURRENT STATUS OF LAWSUIT

The original suit is ongoing, though it has been in suspended status since the General Assembly passed and Governor O’Malley signed a law in 2007 requiring Maryland to switch to a voting system that provides voter-verifiable paper ballots. The suit will not be dismissed until such a system is in place.

© SAVEourVotes · 7360 Eden Brook Drive, #713, Columbia, MD 21046 · 410/381-1811 · Email us