If the incumbent mayor of San Diego ends up ahead in the vote counting there over a write-in candidate who had been leading, the write-in candidate is likely to sue over the decision of San Diego elections officials not to count write in votes where the write-in candidate’s name had been filled in by voters but the voters failed to fill in an oval indicating that they were declaring a write-in vote. See this Los Angeles Times report and this San Diego Union-Tribune report.
This raises a pattern of litigation we have seen in Florida and elsewhere. Is it more important to stick with the technical rules for casting votes or following the “intent” of the voters, assuming, as in this case, the intent can be fairly ascertained without the need for much discretionary judgment? The issue may be more complicated in the San Diego case by the possible failure of elections officials to give adequate instructions for casting a write-in vote. According to the Union-Tribune article, “The lawsuit is likely to note that instructions for absentee voting sent by the registrar’s office did not explicitly tell voters they needed to fill in the oval if voting for a write-in candidate.”