Big Win on Punch Card Voting Machines in Ohio

Not only did the court reject the claim that punch card voting machines are unconstitutional, but the judge accepted my arguments on comparing punch cards to other voting machines. The ACLU described the case as: "ACLU’s Historic Challenge to Ohio’s “Hanging Chad” Punch Cards." Among the quotes from his decision:

The study of Dr. Lott, defendants’ expert, makes a strong case for the proposition that punch card voting technology fares quite well in comparison to other technologies when considering drop-off or residual vote in elections beyond that of the presidency for the years 1992, 1996, and 2000.

(The link to the decision will be working later today.)