The only manual examination mandated is of a small percentage of precincts, to determine if there is a problem, and what its nature is. There is no mandate for a thorough hand recount. But if there is a hand recount, it is supposed to be of all ballots in the jurisdiction, not just undervotes. Since the recount had no mandated standard, it is subject to challenge in order to clarify what the phrase "intent of the voter" might mean, and there is no obligation to count dimpled chads. In any case, taking the count out of the hands of duly appointed officers, and setting a novel timetable, requires that the court show a sufficient cause for such a drastic remedy. Judge Sauls ruled, correctly, that such there was no reason to compel manual recounts. The Florida Supreme Court overruled, but is itself subject to scrutiny.
You are wrong about Texas law, as well, which requires the agreement of the parties to standards for the manual recount, and can nevertheless subject contested ballots to judicial review. Texas is much more stringent. I will not bother to answer much more, since the gist is in error...... |
