UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
v.
Civil Action No. 93-1134-LH/LFG
CIBOLA COUNTY, NEW MEXICO;
CIBOLA COUNTY BOARD OF
COMMISSIONERS; ELMER CHAVEZ,
BENNIE COHOE, FRANK EMERSON,
ANTONIO GALLEGOS, EDWARD
MICHAEL, and JANE PITTS, Members
of the Cibola County Board of
Commissioners; and EILEEN M.
MARTINEZ, Cibola County Clerk,
Defendants.
___________________________________
AMENDED COMPLAINT
Plaintiff United States of America hereby alleges: 1. The Attorney General files
this action pursuant to Sections 2 and 203 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, as amended,
42 U.S.C. §§ 1973 and 1973aa-1a, and to enforce rights guaranteed by the Fourteenth
and Fifteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. This action is also brought to
enforce the voter registration administration requirements of Section 8 of the National
Voter Registration Act of 1993 ("NVRA"), 42 U.S.C. § 1973gg-6, and the
provisional ballot and identification requirements of Sections 302 and 303 of the Help America
Vote Act of 2002 ("HAVA"), 42 U.S.C. §§ 15482 and 15483.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
2. This Court has jurisdiction
over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1345, 42 U.S.C. §§ 1973j(f),
1973aa-2, 1973gg-9(a) and 15511. Section 204 of the Voting Rights of 1965, as amended,
42 U.S.C. § 1973aa-2, requires that the claim brought pursuant to Section 203 of the
Voting Rights Act be heard and determined by a court of three judges in accordance with the
provisions of Section 2284 of Title 28 of the United States Code.
3. Venue for this action is
proper in the United States District Court for the District of New Mexico.
See 28 U.S.C. §§ 111 and 1391(b).
PARTIES
4. Plaintiff United States of
America seeks declaratory and injunctive relief pursuant to Sections 12(d) and 204 of the
Voting Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 1973j(d) and 1973aa-2, Section 11 of the NVRA,
42 U.S.C. § 1973gg-9, Section 401 of HAVA, 42 U.S.C. § 15511, and pursuant
to the Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201 and 2202. 5. Defendant Cibola County
is an organized political subdivision of the State of New Mexico and exists under the laws of that state.
6. Defendant Cibola County
Board of Commissioners is the general governing and managing body of Cibola County.
7. Defendant Elmer Chavez is a
member of the Cibola County Board of Commissioners and is sued in his official capacity.
8. Defendant Bennie Cohoe is a
member of the Cibola County Board of Commissioners and is sued in his official capacity.
9. Defendant Frank Emerson is a
member of the Cibola County Board of Commissioners and is sued in his official capacity.
10. Defendant Antonio Gallegos is
a member of the Cibola County Board of Commissioners and is sued in his official capacity.
11. Defendant Edward Michael is a
member of the Cibola County Board of Commissioners and is sued in his official capacity.
12. Defendant Jane Pitts is a member
of the Cibola County Board of Commissioners and is sued in her official capacity.
13. Defendant Eileen M. Martinez is
the Cibola County Clerk and is responsible for the administration of procedures for voter
registration and for the conduct of elections in Cibola County. She is sued in her official capacity.
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
14. Cibola County includes all or
part of the following American Indian reservations: the Laguna Pueblo ("Laguna"), the Acoma
Pueblo ("Acoma"), and the Ramah Chapter of the Navajo Nation ("Ramah"). According to the
1990 Census, Cibola County had a total population of 23,794 persons of whom 9,155 (38.5%)
were American Indian. According to the 1990 Census, 2,590 of the American Indians residing
in Cibola County were members of the Acoma Pueblo, and 3,718 were members of the Laguna Pueblo;
the reported number of Navajos residing in the County was 1,821. According to 2000 Census data,
Cibola County's population is 25,595, of whom 10,680 (41.73%) are American Indian. Of the
County's American Indian population, 2,755 (25.80%) reside at Acoma, 3,725 (34.88%) reside
at Laguna, and 2,100 (19.67%) reside at Ramah. The County's voting age population is 17,745,
of whom 6,720 (37.87%) are American Indian.
15. Members of the Acoma and
Laguna Pueblos speak different dialects of Keresan, and these dialects of the Keresan
language are a common means of communication among Pueblo Indians within Cibola County. The
Navajo language is a common means of communication among the County's Navajo residents. Both
Navajo and Keresan are historically unwritten languages.
16. The Navajo, Acoma, and Laguna
populations in Cibola County are geographically concentrated. Navajo citizens tend to live
in the Ramah Chapter of the Navajo Nation, where the overwhelming majority of the population
is Navajo. Acoma citizens tend to live in the Acoma Pueblo, where the overwhelming majority
of the population is Acoma. Laguna citizens tend to live in the Laguna Pueblo, where the
overwhelming majority of the population is Laguna.
17. American Indians in Cibola
County have suffered a long history of official discrimination, including discrimination
affecting the right to vote. American Indians in New Mexico were denied the right to
register and vote until 1948. In more recent years, federal courts have held that various
voting devices and procedures implemented within New Mexico and Cibola County have denied
American Indian citizens a fair opportunity for effective political participation. American
Indians in Cibola County continue to bear the effects of past discrimination in such areas
as education, health, housing and employment.
18. Navajo and Pueblo citizens
live in a state of isolation from the processes of election and government, as conducted by
Defendants. This isolation is manifested in terms of language and culture, and in terms of
sheer geographical distance, exacerbated by poor road conditions and by the Navajos' and
Pueblos' relative lack of access to automobiles and telephones.
Voter Registration
19. Upon information and belief,
in the months leading to the November 2, 2004 general election, more than 500 American
Indian citizens from the Laguna Pueblo completed and properly submitted voter registration
forms to become registered to vote in Cibola County.
20. The voter registration
applications for these newly-registered Laguna voters were submitted to the County prior
to the voter registration deadline established by state law. For the November 2, 2004
general election, that date was October 5, 2004.
21. American Indian citizens
from Acoma and Ramah also completed and properly submitted voter registration forms to
become registered to vote in Cibola County.
Early Voting
22. New Mexico law sets forth
procedures permitting duly registered voters to cast ballots before election day.
See, e.g. N.M. Stat. Ann. § 1-6-5.7. That process is known as "early voting."
23. October 16, 2004 was the
first day of early voting for the November 2, 2004 general election.
24. The November 2, 2004 general
election was an election in which federal offices were on the ballot.
25. Starting on October 16, 2004,
persons from Laguna who recently had registered to vote attempted to participate in early
voting in Cibola County.
26. Despite their having completed
and submitted proper and timely voter registration applications, persons from Laguna discovered
that their names were not on the official voter registration list for Cibola County.
27. These persons' names were
omitted from the official list of registered voters because Cibola County failed to process
their voter registration applications prior to the start of early voting or before the
general election on November 2, 2004.
28. Cibola County poll officials
did not permit these persons to participate in early voting for the November 2, 2004 election,
either by voting machine or by provisional ballot.
Provisional Ballots
29. For the November 2, 2004 election,
Cibola County failed to ensure that provisional ballots were available in precincts at Acoma,
Laguna, and Ramah by 7:00 a.m., the time the polls are required to be open.
30. For the November 2, 2004 election,
Cibola County did not deliver provisional ballots to precincts at Acoma and Laguna until
several hours after polls opened. It failed to deliver provisional ballots to Ramah until early afternoon.
31. For the November 2, 2004 election,
Cibola County also failed to deliver a sufficient number of outer envelopes, in which the voted
provisional ballots are placed, to certain precincts at Laguna.
32. These outer envelopes require
the voter to affirm his or her eligibility to vote and to provide identifying information, which
enables Cibola County to verify the voter's eligibility to vote.
33. At the November 2, 2004 election,
a number of voters at Acoma, Laguna and Ramah, who stated that they were eligible to vote, were
not on the voter registration list despite their claims of eligibility to vote.
34. At the November 2, 2004 election,
some voters at Laguna, Acoma, and Ramah were not able to cast a provisional ballot despite their
claims of eligibility to vote.
35. Approximately 260 provisional
ballots were cast in the November 2, 2004 election in Cibola County.
36. Approximately 176 of the 260
provisional ballots cast in the November 2, 2004 election in Cibola County were cast in precincts
located at Acoma, Laguna or Ramah.
37. Approximately 127 of the 260
provisional ballots cast in the November 2, 2004 election in Cibola County were cast in
precincts located at Laguna.
38. Cibola County rejected at
least 103 provisional ballots cast in the November 2, 2004 election. Of the 103 rejected
provisional ballots, 36 were rejected because of the omission of outer envelopes, which
Cibola County failed to supply in sufficient quantities or the poll workers were not
properly trained to provide these outer envelopes. Thirty-two of these 36 rejected ballots
were cast in precincts at Laguna.
39. At least 51 voters who
completed and submitted a voter registration application on or prior to the voter registration
deadline of October 5, 2004 were omitted from Cibola County's voter registration list for
the November 2, 2004 general election. All 51 voters were from precincts located at Acoma,
Laguna or Ramah.
40. Cibola County failed to process
voter registration applications in a timely manner. Cibola County processed at least 35 voter
registration applications after early voting began on October 16, 2004. These 35 registered
voters could not participate in early voting.
41. Cibola County rejected
provisional ballots cast in the November 2, 2004 election by some voters whose voter
registration applications were completed and submitted prior to the registration deadline
of October 5, 2004. Cibola County did not process the registration applications for voters
in a timely fashion. A vast majority of the rejected ballots were cast in precincts
located at Acoma, Laguna or Ramah.
Identification Requirements
42. For voter registration
applications submitted by mail and received by Cibola County after January 1, 2003, but
prior to the November 2004 general election, Cibola County failed to identify and note on
its voter registration list which applicants were registering for the first time in Cibola County.
43. Accordingly, for elections
for federal office held in 2004, poll officials failed to request identification from voters
who registered to vote by mail since January 1, 2003, and who had not previously voted in
an election for federal office and who had not otherwise submitted appropriate identifying information.
June 6, 2006 Federal Primary Election
44. Cibola County continued to have
numerous registration list errors for the June 6, 2006 federal primary election due, in part,
to the county clerk's practice of having voters' names removed from the registration
list or placed on the inactive list solely on the basis that the voter had not voted in any
election for two federal election cycles (or four years).
45. Cibola County did not properly
train election officials prior to the June 6, 2006 federal primary election to ensure that
voters, who were otherwise qualified to receive a provisional ballot, would receive a
provisional ballot for that election.
46. Cibola County also did not
provide sufficient training to poll workers regarding the identification requirements for
voters who registered to vote by mail after January 1, 2003 and who have not previously
voted in an election for federal office. Some poll workers for the June 6, 2006 primary
election were unsure about the circumstances under which they are required to request
identification from a voter and what forms of identification are legally acceptable.
CLAIMS FOR RELIEF: SECTIONS 2 AND 203
47. Plaintiff restates and
incorporates herein the allegations of Paragraphs 1 through 46 of this Amended Complaint.
48. In 1984, Cibola County
became subject to the requirements of Section 203 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, as amended,
42 U.S.C. § 1973aa-1a ("Section 203"), as a result of a determination by the Director
of the Census. 49 Fed. Reg. 25887 (June 25, 1984). This determination required the County
to furnish oral instructions, assistance and other information relating to registration and
voting in the Keresan language.
49. In 1992, Cibola County became
subject to the requirements of Section 203 for Navajo as well as Pueblo voters as a result
of determinations by the Director of the Census. 57 Fed. Reg. 43213 (September 18, 1992).
The County remains covered for these language groups. 67 Fed. Reg. 48,871, 48,872 (July 26, 2002).
These determinations of the Director of the Census require Cibola County to furnish oral
instructions, assistance and other information relating to registration and voting, in
both Navajo and Keresan.
50. Defendants are prohibited
by Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 1973, from
applying or imposing any voting qualification or prerequisite to voting or standard, practice,
or procedure which results in a denial or abridgement of the right of Navajo and Pueblo
citizens to vote.
51. In conducting elections
within Cibola County, Defendants have failed to furnish, in the Keresan and Navajo languages,
the information and assistance necessary to allow Pueblo and Navajo residents fair opportunity
for effective political participation, including the following:
a. Although
Defendants provide a significant amount of information regarding voting and the election
process in the English language, such information has not been provided effectively in the
Keresan and Navajo languages. Examples of such information include information regarding
the voter registration process, the absentee voting process, the voter registration
cancellation process, and the offices and issues to be voted upon at the election.
b.
Defendants have failed to provide a sufficient number of adequately trained bilingual persons
to serve as translators for Pueblo and Navajo voters needing assistance at the polls on election day.
52. In addition to failing to
provide information regarding elections and voting in the Navajo and Keresan languages,
Defendants have failed to implement practices and procedures which would afford American
Indian citizens in the isolated Navajo and Pueblo residential concentrations an opportunity,
equal to that afforded to other County residents, to register to vote, to obtain and cast
absentee ballots, and to avoid voter registration cancellation.
53. Defendants' failure to
provide Navajo and Pueblo residents of Cibola County with the oral instructions, assistance
and other information relating to registration and voting necessary for effective political
participation constitutes a violation of Section 203 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, as
amended, 42 U.S.C. § 1973aa-1a.
54. Defendants' election-related
practices and procedures, as applied to Navajo and Pueblo citizens, implemented under the
totality of circumstances described herein, constitute a denial of the right of Pueblo and
Navajo citizens to participate in the political process and elect candidates of their choice
on an equal basis with other citizens in violation of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of
1965, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 1973.
55. Unless enjoined by this Court,
Defendants will continue to enforce voting standards, practices, and procedures in a manner
which denies Navajo and Pueblo citizens an opportunity to participate effectively and on an
equal basis with other citizens in violation of Sections 2 and 203 of the Voting Rights Act
of 1965, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 1973 and 1973aa-1a, and the voting guarantees
of the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments.
CLAIM FOR RELIEF: NVRA
56. Plaintiff restates and
incorporates herein the allegations of Paragraphs 1 through 46 of this Amended Complaint.
57. Section 8 of the NVRA,
42 U.S.C. § 1973gg-6, provides that applicants who submit valid voter registration forms
must be registered to vote in an election for federal office if those forms are received or
accepted by an appropriate state elections officer, voter registration agency, or motor
vehicle authority (or in the case of registration by mail, postmarked) no later than the
lesser of 30 days, or the period provided by State law, before the date of the next election
for federal office. See 42 U.S.C. § 1973gg-6(a)(1)(A),(B),(C), and (D).
58. Section 8 of the NVRA sets
forth specific notice procedures, including the requirement to mail a specific address
confirmation notice via forwardable mail, which must be undertaken prior to removing the
voter's name from the official voter registration list. See 42 U.S.C. § 1973gg-6(d).
In New Mexico, once a voter is placed on inactive status, "the failure of [that] voter to
vote in at least one statewide or local election in a four-year period" thereafter
"shall be grounds for cancellation of registration." N.M. Stat. Ann. § 1-4-28.
59. Section 8 specifically
prohibits the removal of a voter from the official voter registration list based on the
voter's failure to vote in an election. See 42 U.S.C. § 1973gg-6(b).
nbsp; 60. Under New Mexico law,
voter registration closes 28 days before an election. See N.M. Stat. Ann. § 1-4-8(A)(6).
61. Voter registration closed
in New Mexico on Tuesday, October 5, 2004 for the November 2, 2004 general election. Accordingly,
Cibola County was required to process all valid voter registration applications that were
postmarked or dated and subscribed by October 5, 2004. See 42 U.S.C. § 1973gg-6(a)
(1)(A),(B),(C), and (D).
62. Defendants, their employees, and
agents have failed, and continue to fail, to implement or fully implement the voter registration
administration requirements of Section 8 of the NVRA, 42 U.S.C. § 1973gg-6, in the
following respects:
a. Cibola County
has failed to register to vote in elections for federal office eligible voter registration
applicants who submitted valid, timely voter registration applications to appropriate authorities;
b. Defendants
have failed to develop and implement appropriate procedures to ensure that agents, employees
and representatives of Cibola County register to vote in elections for federal office all
eligible voter registration applicants who submitted valid, timely voter registration
applications to appropriate authorities;
c. Cibola County
has removed the names of voters from the registration list or placed them on the inactive
registration list based on their failure to vote; and
d. Defendants
have failed to develop and implement appropriate procedures to ensure that for elections
for federal office, voters' names are not removed from the official list of registered
voters without following the procedures set forth in Section 8(d) of the NVRA.
63. Unless and until ordered
to do so by this Court, Defendants will not provide eligible persons in Cibola County who
apply for voter registration an effective opportunity to register to vote in elections for
federal office as required by Section 8(a)(1) of the NVRA, 42 U.S.C. § 1973gg-6(a)(1).
64. Unless and until ordered to
do so by this Court, Defendants will not implement appropriate procedures to ensure that for
elections for federal office, voters' names are not removed from the official list of
registered voters without following the procedures set forth in Section 8(d) of the NVRA,
42 U.S.C. § 1973gg-6(d).
CLAIM FOR RELIEF: HAVA
65. Plaintiff restates and
incorporates herein the allegations in Paragraphs 1 through 46 of this Amended Complaint.
66. Section 302(a) of HAVA,
42 U.S.C. § 15482(a), requires state and local election officials to provide provisional
ballots to individuals whose names do not appear on an official voter registration list
but who declare they are registered to vote in the jurisdiction in which they intend to
vote and eligible to vote in an election for federal office, and who affirm in writing that
he or she is a registered voter in the jurisdiction and eligible to vote in that election.
42 U.S.C. § 15482(a)(2).
67. Section 303(b) of HAVA,
42 U.S.C. § 15483(b), requires that voters who registered to vote by mail after
January 1, 2003, and who had not previously voted in an election for federal office in
Cibola County, provide certain identifying information. State or local election officials
must require appropriate proof of identification from such registrants who have not
otherwise provided sufficient identifying information before attempting to vote in an election
for federal office.
68. Defendants did not provide
sufficient quantities of provisional ballots for the November 2, 2004 general election in
Cibola County. As a result, voters who were qualified for provisional ballots under Section 302(a)
of HAVA improperly were denied access to provisional ballots. The failure of Defendants to
provide provisional ballots to such voters violated Section 302(a) of HAVA, 42 U.S.C. § 15482(a).
nbsp; 69. Defendants did not deliver
sufficient quantities of outer envelopes in which to place the voted provisional ballots for
the November 2, 2004 general election in Cibola County. Voters are required to sign a written
affirmation of their eligibility to vote on the outer envelopes. As a result, voters who
qualified for provisional ballots under Section 302(a) of HAVA were unable to sign a written
affirmation before an election official because of the absence of the outer envelopes. The
absence of the outer envelopes containing the written affirmation of voters caused these
provisional ballots to be incomplete. These incomplete provisional ballots were not
and could not be counted. The failure of Defendants to provide the outer envelopes for the
provisional ballots violated Section 302(a)(2) of HAVA, 42 U.S.C. § 15482(a)(2).
70. Defendants did not properly
train poll workers prior to the June 6, 2006 primary election regarding the requirements
for offering and completing provisional ballots and when such ballots should be provided
to voters. This failure violated the requirement for ensuring that provisional ballots
are provided to voters in accordance with Section 302(a) of HAVA, 42 U.S.C. § 15482(a).
71. For elections for federal
office in Cibola County occurring in 2004, Defendants did not require identification from
voters who registered by mail after January 1, 2003 and who had not previously voted in an
election for federal office. For the June 2006 federal primary election, Cibola County
did not train poll workers regarding the identification requirements for such voters or
the forms of identification sufficient to meet these requirements. These failures to
require proof of identification of such voters and properly train poll workers violated Section
303(b) of HAVA, 42 U.S.C. § 15483(b).
72. Defendants, their employees
and agents have failed, and continue to fail, to comply fully with Sections 302(a) and 303(b)
of HAVA, 42 U.S.C. §§ 15482(a) and 15483(b), in the following respects:
a. Cibola County
has failed to provide provisional ballots to individuals whose names did not appear on an
official voter registration list but who declared they were registered to vote in Cibola
County and eligible to vote in an election for federal office;
b. Defendants
have failed to develop and implement appropriate procedures to ensure that provisional
ballots and provisional ballot outer envelopes are provided to individuals whose names
did not appear on an official voter registration list but who declared they were registered
to vote in Cibola County and eligible to vote in an election for federal office;
c. Defendants
have failed to develop and implement appropriate procedures to ensure that, for elections
for federal office occurring after January 1, 2004, voters who registered to vote by mail
after January 1, 2003, and who have not previously voted in an election for federal office
in Cibola County, provide appropriate identifying information.
73. Unless and until ordered to
do so by this Court, Defendants will not provide eligible persons in Cibola County an
appropriate opportunity to cast provisional ballots, as required by Section 302(a) of HAVA,
42 U.S.C. § 15482(a).
74. Unless and until ordered to
do so by this Court, Defendants will not require appropriate identifying information from
voters who registered to vote by mail after January 1, 2003 and who have not previously voted
in an election for federal office in Cibola County, as required by Sections 303(b) of
HAVA, 42 U.S.C. § 15483(b).
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff United States of America prays
for an order:
A. Declaring that Defendants have
failed to provide effective oral instructions, assistance and other information relating to
registration and voting in the Keresan and Navajo languages in violation of Sections 2 and
203 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 1973 and 1973aa-1a,
and the voting guarantees of the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution;
B. Declaring that Defendants' standards,
practices, and procedures relating to registration, registration cancellation, absentee voting,
and assistance at the polls deny Pueblo and Navajo citizens in Cibola County an opportunity equal
to that enjoyed by other citizens to participate in the political process in violation of Section 2
of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 1973, and the voting guarantees
of the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution;
C. Requiring Defendants to devise a
plan to assure that Navajo and Pueblo citizens of Cibola County, including those who rely in
whole or in part on the Keresan or Navajo language, have an opportunity equal to that of other
members of the electorate to register to vote, avoid cancellation of registration, cast an
absentee ballot, and otherwise to participate effectively in all phases of the election process;
D. Requiring Defendants to implement
the remedial plan promptly upon approval by this Court;
E. Authorizing the appointment of
federal observers for elections in Cibola County pursuant to Section 3(a) of the Voting Rights
Act of 1965, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 1973a(a);
F. Declaring that Defendants are
in violation of Sections 8(a)(1) and 8(b) of the NVRA, 42 U.S.C. §§ 1973gg-6(a)(1)
and 1973gg-6(b), by failing to ensure that Cibola County (1) processed voter registration
applications for elections for federal office in a timely manner, and (2) maintained an
accurate and current voter registration roll for elections for federal office;
G. Declaring that Defendants are
in violation of Section 8(d) of the NVRA, 42 U.S.C. 1973gg-6(d), by failing to ensure that
the procedures set forth in that statute were followed prior to removal of persons from the
voter registration list in elections for federal office;
H. Declaring that Defendants are
in violation of Sections 302(a) and 303(b) of HAVA, 42 U.S.C. §§ 15482(a) and 15483(b),
by failing to ensure that Cibola County, in elections for federal office, (1) distributed,
delivered, and offered provisional ballots as appropriate to Cibola County precincts and voters,
and (2) required identification of voters who registered to vote by mail after January 1, 2003
and who have not previously voted in an election for federal office in Cibola County;
I. Enjoining Defendants, their
agents and successors in office, and all persons acting in concert with any of them from
failing or refusing to comply with Sections 2 and 203 of the Voting Rights Act,
42 U.S.C. §§ 1973 and 1973aa-1a, Sections 8(a)(1), 8(b) and 8(d) of the
NVRA, 42 U.S.C. §§ 1973gg-6(a)(1), 1973gg-6(b), and 1973gg-6(d), and Sections 302(a) and
303(b) of HAVA, 42 U.S.C. §§ 15482(a), 15483(b);
J. Requiring Defendants to process
voter registration applications in a timely fashion and to maintain an accurate and current
voter registration list in compliance with Section 8 of the NVRA, 42 U.S.C. § 1973gg-6;
K. Requiring Defendants to distribute,
deliver, offer, and collect provisional ballots in compliance with the requirements of Section 302(a)
of HAVA, 42 U.S.C. § 15482(a), in elections for federal office;
L. Requiring Defendants to request
and obtain appropriate identifying information from voters who registered to vote by mail
after January 1, 2003 and who have not previously voted in an election for federal office
in Cibola County, pursuant to the Section 303(b) of HAVA, 42 U.S.C. § 15483(b); and
M. Requiring Defendants to provide
this Court within 30 days from the date of any order imputing liability a plan to remedy any
demonstrated violation of federal law. That plan also should include a means for County counsel
to monitor and certify to this Court and to the United States that the County is meeting its
obligations under federal law on a regular basis going forward.
Plaintiff further prays that this Court order such
other relief as the interests of justice may require, together with the costs and disbursements
of this action.
Respectfully Submitted,
DAVID C. IGLESIAS
United States Attorney
District of New Mexico
Electronically Filed on January 31, 2007
RAYMOND HAMILTON
Assistant United States Attorney
P. O. Box 607
Albuquerque, NM 87103
(505) 346-7274
WAN J. KIM
Assistant Attorney General
JOHN K. TANNER
GAYE TENOSO
RICHARD DELLHEIM
ERIC M. EVERSOLE
JARED SLADE
Attorneys, Voting Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Room 7254-NWB
950 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington, D.C. 20530
(202) 305-1734
