Hits: 0
WPCNR
Matthew Gallagher, the Westchester County Attorney handling the Glen Hockley suit contending Hockley’s civil rights were violated when he was denied the ballot in the city Mayoral election last fall, told WPCNR, that the three months that the Glen Hockley vs. The Westchester Board of Elections case, now being considered by Southern District Federal Court Judge Cathy Seibel “is not unusual.” Gallagher said he filed his last motion to dismiss April 2.
Gallagher also pointed out that Judge Seibel has virtually unlimited powers to establish a remedy.
Hockley,
Among the remedies Gallagher said that could be imposed would be a new election between Mr. Hockley and the now incumbent Mayor Adam Bradley. Gallagher said the judge had wide. latitude to fashion a remedy, citing the recent federal ruling against the
Judge Seibel has a unique and excruciating choice. If she dismisses the Hockley suit, you might say she is upholding the rights of the political bosses and operatives appointed by political parties to continue to be the ultimate gatekeepers.
If she rules in Hockley’s favor, she would be making a precedent-setting decision on the federal level that would have national effects, sweeping away the many hoops and obstacles to political newcomers access to the ballot, who find themselves blocked from the ballot by paperwork errors.
The local Board of Elections has shown particularly pickiness towards petitions and efforts of insurgent candidates. It attempted to keep Candyce Corcoran off the ballot for Common Council due a signature error on her petitions. Corcoran herself found a
Mr. Hockley is the latest victim of Board of Elections vigilance and intense examination of detail and paperwork where challenging candidates are concerned. As a result of the keeping Mr. Hockley off the ballot last November, Adam Bradley ran unopposed.
Ramifications of a new election:
If Judge Seibel were to call for a new election shortly, say a rerun of Adam Bradley vs. Glen Hockley in November of this year, this would raise the spectre of a possible Hockley victory due to the unpopularity of the Mayor that has surfaced from his personal problems which he is working through in the courts.
However, the judge could conceivably call for a completely new election, opening nominations to all parties to run against Hockley. That type of election would put the Democratic party on the spot, (if Seibel did not order Bradley be on the ballot), making such an election a completely open process.
The Democrat City Committee, for example, would be put on the spot. Should they renominate Bradley who might surely lose due to the unpopularlity caused by his recent domestic violence case, say nominating Bill Ryan or Benjamin Boykin, or Dennis Power, instead?
Thomas Roach, the Common Council President is not eligible since he is running for Assembly.
Another possibility would be for Judge Seibel to remove Bradley on an interim basis, in which case Roach would take over as Mayor until the election were held.
WPCNR wants to assure that Mr. Gallagher did not suggest any of these scenarios, his comment was the federal court possesses “a wide latitude” in devising remedies to correct situations.
In this instance, it is not easy being a judge.
The lawsuit originally was filed without an attorney by Hockley,
The suit names Westchester Board of Elections Commissioners Reginald LaFayette and Carolee Sunderland, two of the Board’s employees, Jeannie L. Palazola and Douglas Colety, and White Plains Councilman Dennis Power.
The Judge gave the plaintiffs (Mr. Hockley and Mr. London) an opportunity to amend their original complaint to focus more on issues of interest to the federal court. The amended complaint alleges conspiracy with malicious intent to keep Hockley off the ballot for mayor, to suppress the vote during election day and to try to manipulate the results after election day. It alleges interference with constitutional rights and voting rights.
The lawsuit alleges that
The lawsuit alleges that the right of voters in
As you may recall, Hockley’s name was removed from the ballot, and he conducted a write-in campaign. Among other things, the lawsuit alleges that county election officials failed to stock machines with pencils for write-ins, as required by law…..and that poll workers were not properly trained in doing write-in votes and did not help voters with write-ins.
The lawsuit asks for a jury trial; a finding that the Plantiff’s constitutional rights were violated; a new election; undefined compensatory and punitive damages; and, legal fees and costs.
