Nevada's 'none' to be heard by 9th Circuit panel

[Smilo]

CARSON CITY, Nev. (AP) — The unique Nevada law that allows voters to cast a ballot for "none of the above" is coming under new scrutiny over whether it's constitutional.

A U.S. appeals court will hear arguments Monday in a lawsuit backed by national Republicans that argues the ballot option violates federal law by disenfranchising voters.

Nevada is the only state in the nation that gives voters the option of "none of these candidates" in statewide races — president, U.S. Senate, state constitutional officers and the Nevada Supreme Court. Nevada enacted the law as a way to combat voter apathy in the wake of the Watergate scandal that brought down President Richard Nixon. It was intended to give voters a way to voice their displeasure with candidates and elected officials at the ballot box.

Though sometimes a popular choice, "none" can never win even if it receives the most votes. That's never happened in a general election contest, though "none" has played spoiler in some high-profile races.

Republicans sued last year over the law, fearing "none" could siphon votes from a disgruntled electorate and sway the outcome of a close presidential or U.S. Senate race.

Filed on behalf of 11 Nevada voters, the suit claimed that not allowing "none" to win in an election violates a slew of constitutional protections such as due process and equal protection, not to mention the Voting Rights Act.

http://www.rgj.com/viewart/20130310/NEWS/303100076/Nevada-s-none-heard-by-9th-Circuit-panel

[Tempest]

1. No different than a legislator or member of Congress voting "present"

Or abstaining from a vote.

It affects the outcome but has never been seen as an un-Constitutional act.