WPC: D\$$l -/3+%@aԦr%nr@V!aVuV0̓ޏ {IzM|n%yIߦץRdf+lT[UJ HakЁR2#YGؾ}=#G\0=J`ez||XcO5-4 oS+]{:[(K)$ OF8g'E3ʑTGi@j, 9@~KV¹`-d!POxlr4%NҒ[>!0r1H^b<Urok˲"TތLq۞ln=Z.e_F}ټkyGo!kG[SZ{/Ed.M2!$f)a))ed,.0f&3a(3<3S3 0n365 0_F5#6(n9 1u9 72 :N=:w?:4C:^ W:c: me:;|:,xA`Univers,xA`UniversXX~xP7XP,xA`UniversxP7P,xA`UniversixP7PX  7)Q=pP 0 pP0 "XQ   (4$  _XX Page  1  0 p REPLYOFAPPLICANTSONAPPLICATIONFORSTAYOFOREGON ` SUPREMECOURTORDER,PENDINGCERTIORARIREVIEW (R27$ *!XQ=pP 0 pP0 "XQ  =FXhXdd= (43-  Table_A d  _x  _xTable_B($0 ($0 0 (($0 0 0 (2$0 0 0 0 (<$0 0 0 0 0 $35;AGMU]c1I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)($      *!@@XQ=pP 0 pP0 "XQ  =vXhXdd= (4$  _  1  .0  EvenifRespondentsaysthislossof4dayswasaslipofthepen,weknowfromexperiencethatthe  countiesoftendonottakealloftheavailabletimebeforemailingtheirballotstovoters.Oregonlaw P allowsballotsfortheNovember2electiontobemailedasearlyasOctober15andaslateasOctober @ 19.Thecountiesstrivetomailtheballotsattheearliestpossibletime.Somehavethemloadedonthe  docksofU.S.PostOfficesonthe19thdaybeforetheelection,sothattheycanbemailedjustafter 0 midnight.The_timelines_ԀofferedbyRespondent(consideringhisbeliefthatthedeadlineisOctober15)   areverylikelybasedupontheassumptionthatthecountieswillbemailingtheballotsonthefirst p possibledate,October15.Takingtheadditional4daysallowedbystatutewouldlikelyrelievethe  ` situationRespondentdescribes.  *!@@XQ=pP 0 pP0 "XQ  =vXhXdd= (4$  _  2  .0  ORS254.500Tallyofwrite-invotes. (#(# 0  (1)Thissectiongovernsthetallyofvotescastforpersonswhosenameswerenotprintedontheballot @ butarewritteninbyelectors.Allsuchwrite-invotesforeachofficeontheballotshallbetalliedtogether,  exceptasfollows:0(#(# 0  8p(#(#(a)Ifthetotalnumberofwrite-invotesforcandidatesforthesamenominationoroffice p equalsorexceedsthenumberofvotescastforanycandidateforthesamenominationor  ` officeontheballotwhoappearstohavebeennominatedorelected,thecountyclerkshall   tallyallwrite-invotescastfortheofficetoshowthetotalnumberofvotescastforeach P   write-incandidate. @ pH!pH!      0  8p(#(#(b)Ifnonamesofcandidatesareprintedontheballotforanoffice,thecountyclerkshall  tallythevotescastforeachcandidatefortheofficewhoreceivedavote.PpH!pH! 0  (2)Nopersonotherthanthecountyclerk,amemberofacountingboardoranyotherelectionsofficial  designatedbythecountyclerkmaytallywrite-invotes.  *!@@XQ=pP 0 pP0 "XQ  =vXhXdd= (4$  _  3  .0  Respondent'sargumentregardingirreparableharm(p.17)conflatestheexistenceofharmwiththe  meritsofthecase.Applicantshavedemonstratedtheirreparableharmofforeverbeingexcludedfrom P the2004Oregongeneralelectionballot.Thefindingofharmdoesnotdependonafindinginfavorof @ Applicantsonthemerits.  *!@@XQ=pP 0 pP0 "XQ  =vXhXdd= (4$  _  4  .0  DeclarationofDanielW.Meek,p.1(attached).  *!@@XQ=pP 0 pP0 "XQ  =vXhXdd= (4$  _  5  .0  ItmayalsobepossibletooverprinttheregularballotssothatthePresidentialportionisblackedout. C *!@@XQ=pP 0 pP0 "XQ  =vXhXdd= (4$  _  6  .0  Asforthesupposeddifficultrequirementof"trackingtheballotsofeachindividualvoter,"thatisdoneby  thecountyelectionsofficersinanyevent,usingbarcodereadersontheouterballotenvelopes. P Respondentoffersnocrediblereasonthatallvoterscannotbe"tracked,"becausethisalreadyoccurs; @ eachcountymaintainsarecordofwhovotedineveryelection.  *!@@XQ=pP 0 pP0 "XQ  =vXhXdd= (4$  _  7  .0  Respondentwasnotsocarefulinstating(p.14):(#(#   8 p TheSupremeCourt'sfindingthattheSecretaryactedpursuanttopublishedrules @ alsodefeatsapplicants'contentionthattheirsignaturesheetswererejectedwithout  priornotice.0phph 0  ThereisnofindingintheOregonSupremeCourtdecisionthattheSecretaryactedpursuanttoonly p publishedrules.The"rules"whichdisqualifiedthe718verifiedvotersignaturesduetocirculator  ` signatureanddatingproblemswere"unwrittenrules."Therulerequiringsequentialnumberingof   signaturesheetswhensubmittedtothecounties(whichRespondentusedtodisqualify2,354verified P   votersignatures)wasawrittenrule.Table_C  *!@@XQ=pP 0 pP0 "XQ  =vXhXdd= (4$  _  8  .0  The_SER_ԀaccidentallyincludedwithintheblockofTimothyJohnsonsheets4sheetsfromTerence  _Constancio_Ԁ[_SER_Ԅ4346].ThosesheetsbelongbehindTabD,notbehindTabB. [ *!@@XQ=pP 0 pP0 "XQ  =vXhXdd= (4$  _  9  .0  ThesignatureexemplarsforRonald_Rosenloff_ԀareattachedtotheAffidavitofGeorgeKelly.All  affidavitswereadmittedattrial,withoutobjection.  *!@@XQ=pP 0 pP0 "XQ  =vXhXdd= (4$  _  10  .0  WithinAffidavitofVincentSlayer.  *!@@XQ=pP 0 pP0 "XQ  =vXhXdd= (4$  _  11  .0  TheAffidavitofSandra_Kucera_,_SER_Ԅ392,addressesherminordatingerror.Theothersheetssimply  displayminordatingerrors,whichcausedRespondenttorejectthesheets.Table_D' _x(2$ *!XQ=pP 0 pP0 "XQ  =FXhXdd= (43-  FXXX  0  .3|O (7$XQ=pP 0 pP0 "XQ  =FXhXdd= (43-FinePrint,,,,0!3#37=CIQYag1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)-i)1ET\FEDsb;1  Upage page chapter volume footnote endnote  *!XQ=pP 0 pP0 "XQ  =vXhXdd= (43-  _  XX8dd8 =   No.04A242  INTHESUPREMECOURT  OFTHEUNITEDSTATEOFAMERICA    * ddd Xdd Xdd X(#(#,dt ,dd , dd +  J7p p  JSANDRA_KUCERA_,SARAH_THERESE_ p  WINDER,_KRISTIN_Ԁ_ZUBEL_,NATALIE H  BOLTON,PHILLIPSALISBURYSAMANTHA  p  BERG,TIMOTHYJOHNSON,andGREGORY  H  KAFOURY,   0  Applicants,     p v. 0  BILLBRADBURY,SecretaryofState, 0   Respondent,  0  and@ DEMOCRATICPARTYOFOREGON,JOHN @ _NEEL_Ԁ_PENDER_,andJAMES_EDMUNSON_,  0  Respondent_Intervenors_ԀBelow. WM2x##$$ W >4p ##$$ > REPLYOFAPPLICANTS p  ONAPPLICATIONFOR H   STAYOFOREGON  p! SUPREMECOURTORDER,  H" PENDINGCERTIORARI  # REVIEW   '          ! 4*(0,  ##$$ 4 *  dddt dd  dd (#(#,O dd ,dd ,dd +  A78!38! A >48!4##$$ > >48!5##$$ >DANIELW.MEEK 8!6 OSBNo.79124 "`7 10949S.W.4thAvenue "88 Portland,OR97219 #9 (503)29390210 % voice$:%% (503)29390990 % faxp% ;%% dan@meek.net H&!< OfAttorneysforPlaintiffs4*('H#>  ##$$ 4  )$?= @cc8 TABLEOFCONTENTS    _     0     I.0(#(#SCHEDULEFORPRINTINGOFBALLOTSCANACCOMODATETHIS ` COURT'SDECISION.#""p(#.&(#(##1 ' ݌ 8 Ќ    ,0     II.0(#(#RESPONDENT'SMEMORANDUMCONTAINSINCORRECT 8 STATEMENTS.#""p(#.d d (#(##4,G݌   Ќ    =0       A.0p(#(#THESECRETARYOFSTATEAPPLIEDUNWRITTENRULESTO p  DISQUALIFYSUFFICIENTSIGNATURESTOREMOVENADER H   FROMTHEBALLOT.#""p(#.rr+p(#p(##4=X݌  p  Ќ    0       B.0p(#(#THETRIALCOURTDIDNOTDISMISSTHECONSTITUTIONAL   CLAIMSWITHPREJUDICE.#""p(#.1p(#p(##9݌   Ќ    0     III.0(#(#THEOREGONSUPREMECOURT'SCONSTITUTIONALANALYSISWAS X  INCORRECT.#""p(#. (#(##9݌ 0  Ќ    0     IV.0(#(#THEEQUALPROTECTIONCLAIMISNOTNEW.#<"<"o(#...;(#(##10݌ 0 Ќ   _Q=pP 0 pP0 "Q     TheResponseofRespondentoffersseveralmisleadingstatements.It  also  offersanimplausiblecasethattheballotsarenowcastinstoneandcannotbe ` printedcorrectlypriortothestatutorydeadlineformailingballotstovoters. `    2   I  .3  0  SCHEDULEFORPRINTINGOFBALLOTSCAN_ACCOMODATE_ԀTHIS   COURT'SDECISION.   p (#(#   RespondentSecretaryofStateassertsthattheballots,whichhecommitted  p  toprintingwithinminutesoftheOregonSupremeCourtdecisionatthecloseof   businessonSeptember22,2004,nowcannotpossiblyofferOregonvotersa   choicethatincludesRalphNader.IfthisCourtstaystheOregonSupremeCourt 0  decisiontoday,theprintingprocesswillhavelostonly23businessdays. 0   First,Respondenthasstatedanincorrectdeadlineforthemailingofballotsin  Oregon,claimingthatitisOctober15.Infact,itisOctober19,whichis14days @ beforethedayoftheelection.ORS254.470(3)(a).Thus,thereareavailablean @ extra4daysthatRespondentwasapparentlynotawareof._   1      _ԀThus,thedayslost  sinceSeptember22canbemadeupbyusingmoreofthedaysactuallyavailable P underOregonlaw. P   Second,theNaderCampaigncompliedwithalldeadlinesestablishedforthe   filingofthenominatingpetitions,whichweredueonAugust24.TheSecretaryof `!" Statetookaleisurely9daysbeforerejectingthepetitionsonSeptember2,when #`$ hisonlylawfultaskwastocountthenumberofverifiedvotersignaturescontained $ & onthesignaturesheetsalreadyverifiedbythecountiesandalreadyaffixedwith  theaffidavitsofcountyofficialsattestingtothenumberofvalidsignaturesoneach ` sheet.Thistaskshouldhavetakenafewhoursandcertainlynot9days. `   Applicantsherein(Plaintiffsbelow)thenfiledsuitinMarionCountyCircuit   Courtwithin1day(September3).TheCircuitCourtrendereditsdecisionina p  writtenOpinionandOrderonSeptember9.RespondentSecretaryofStatethen  p  tookanother5daystoaskforfinaljudgmentandseekreviewintheOregon   SupremeCourt.Havinghimselfcausedunnecessarydelaysofatleast12days   sinceAugust24,Respondentshouldnotberewardedforthisdelaybyafinding 0  thatitisnowtoolatetoremedyhisunconstitutionalconduct. 0   Third,ifthisCourtdecidesthattherightsofPlaintiffshavebeenviolated,  therearepracticalmeansforOregonvoterstobeallowedameaningful @ opportunitytovoteforNader andtohavetheirvotescounted .Respondent @ concludeshisResponsewiththerathermisleadingstatementthat"votersmaystill  writeintheircandidates'nameontheirballots."But,underOregonlaw,these T votesarenotcounted(asindicatedintheApplication,note3),exceptas T undifferentiated"writeinvotes"notidentifyinganycandidate,unlessthereare   morewriteinvotesforaparticularofficethanarereceivedbyeveryother d!" candidateintherace.ORS254.500.   2      ׀Inotherwords,Naderwouldhavetoobtain #d$ writeinvotesequaltoatleast33%ofthetotalvoteforPresidentinOregon,or  noneofthewriteinvoteswillbecountedexceptasundifferentiated"writeins." ` ThereisnomitigationofharminallowingOregonvoterstomakeameaningless ` gesturebycastingwriteinvotesthatarenotevencountedforthevoter'schosen   candidate.   3       p    ThereareseveralpracticalmeansforOregontocomplywiththeU.S.  p  Constitution.Themostobviouswayistohiremoreprintingfirmstoprintthe   ballots.ThedirectorofRespondent'sElectionsDivision,John_Lindback_,toldthe   attorneyfortheOregonSupremeCourtinaconferencecallonSeptember15that 0  21ofOregon's36countiesusethesameprintingfirm(RiderPrintinginBend, 0 Oregon)andthattheheadofthatfirmstatedthathislastdaytobeginprintingall  ofthese21countieswouldbeSeptember24.   4      ׀Thus,itappearsthattheleadtime @ Respondentnowdemandsisafunctionofhiringtoofewprinterstodothejob. @   Thepracticalsolutionswouldinclude:     p 2   1  .3  0 P Hiringmoreprintingfirmstoprinttheballots,sothatprintingofa P singlecompleteballot,withNader,canstartlater;or(xP (#P (#    p 2   2  .3  0 P PrintingaseparatePresidentialballot,withallqualifiedcandidates, ( andinsertingitinthemailingwiththeregularballotswith   instructionsthatvotersshouldusetheseparatePresidentialballot  ! tovoteforPresident;`    5      ׀or`!"P (#P (# Ї   p 2   3  .3  0 P PrintingaseparatePresidentialballot,withallqualifiedcandidates,  andmailingittoallvotersseparately(iftheregularballothas  alreadybeenmailed),againwithinstructionsthatvotersshoulduse ` theseparatePresidentialballottovoteforPresident.8P (#P (# Eitherofthelatteralternativeswouldbeaccompaniedbycomprehensively 8 publicizingtheadoptedprocessinthepressandmedia.     Fourth,whenimportantU.S.Constitutionalrightsareinvolved,statestatutory H   deadlinesmay,asalastresort,havetoslip.  H    Respondentcontends(p.19)thatvotersmaybeconfused,ifsomebutnotall   countiessucceedinsendingreplacementballotslistingNader.ButRespondent X  doesnotshowthatsomecountieswouldfinditimpossibletoprintandmailballots X withNaderlisted.   6           2   II  .3  0  RESPONDENT'SMEMORANDUMCONTAINSINCORRECT @ STATEMENTS.  3 h(#(#      2   A  .3  0 p THESECRETARYOFSTATEAPPLIEDUNWRITTENRULESTO  DISQUALIFYSUFFICIENTSIGNATURESTOREMOVENADER  FROMTHEBALLOT.  3 xp(#p(#   ThemostsignificantlyincorrectstatementbyRespondentisthattheOregon (x SupremeCourtconcludedthatRespondenthadindeedbeenimplementingonly ( writtenrulesandnotunwrittenrules.TheCircuitCourtspecificallyfoundthe  ! opposite,andtheOregonSupremeCourtdidnotdisagree: 8"# 8  Thetrialcourtdeterminedthatthesignatureanddatereviewprocedures #8% that_Lindback_Ԁhadfollowedinhisofficewere"unwrittenrules,"thatthey $ & were"notsupportedbythewrittenadministrativerulesassetforthinthe % ' Manual,"thattheywere"inconsistentwithORS247.005"and"theprior p&!( policyoftheElectionsDivision"asstatedin Nelson ,andthatthey"were H'") notappliedeitheruniformlyorconsistentlyinactualpractice.""(r#*H!H! Ї8  Itistruethatthereviewproceduresthat_Lindback_Ԁdescribedwere  notthemselveswritten,butthatdoesnotrenderthemunlawful. H!H! SlipOp.at20[_SER_Ԅ429](emphasisadded).Thus,theOregonSupremeCourt 8 recognizedthatRespondenthadbeenusingunwrittenrulesbutconcludedthat 8 practicenottobeinviolationofOregonlaw(aconclusionwecannotcontesthere).     ConsiderthecarefulwordsofRespondent,wherehestates(pp.1314): H   8  TheOregonSupremeCourtdetermined,afterareviewoftherecord,  H  thattheSecretary'sactionswere,infact,authorizedbypublished   statutesandrules,totheextentthatwrittenruleswererequired. H!H! Exactly:"totheextentthatwrittenruleswererequired."WhattheOregon X  SupremeCourtconcludedwasthatitwaslawfulunderOregonlawforthe X SecretaryofStatetoapplyunwrittenrulestodisqualifythesignaturesheetsthat  writtenruleswerenotrequired,underOregonlaw.   7       h   Asthetrialcourtfound,therewereno writtenrules tellingpetitionersthat h circulatorsignaturesmustbe"legible"andmustnot"appeartobeinitials."There  werenowrittenrulesbanningslipsofthepenorothercorrectionstodateson | circulatorsignatures.Yet,Respondenthimselfdiscarded718signaturesbecause ,| oftheseunwrittenrules,withanuntoldadditionalnumberofvotersignatures , discardedatthecountylevelatRespondent'sdirectionthatthecountieswould  ! alsoapplythe"unwrittenrules." <"#   Noristhereanywherestated,inanypublishedrule(orevenanyunpublished  "internalmanagementdirective"[ER93]notprovidedtonominationcampaigns) ` thata_circulator_'ssignaturemustbe"legible,"arequirementmaderedundantby ` therulethatthe_circulator_'sprintednamemustbebelowhersignature.There   werenosheetsrejectedbyRespondentduetoanillegibleprintednameofa p  circulator.  p    Withregardtoinitials,onlytheunpublished"internalmanagementdirective"   [ER93]inanywaymentionsinitials.Itstated:   3.0 p Theareastoreviewforconcernare:0 pH!pH! 8 p o0P phphThecirculatorsignaturelineisblankorthecirculatorhas 0 signedusinginitialsonly.(Firstnameinitialwiththefull  lastnameissufficient)P hP h Thiswasnotadoptedasaruleandwasnotdisseminatedtothosewhofiled @ prospectivenominatingpetitionswiththeSecretaryofState,astheNader @ CampaigndidinJuly2004,pursuanttoORS249.740.Further,itdoesnot  cogentlyaddressthecircumstancewherethe_circulator_'snormalsignature P "appearstobeinitials,"whichwasthestandardactuallyappliedbyRespondent. P   Respondent(pp.910)arguesthatitwasfineforhimto"interpret"theword   "certify"asmeaning"signhisnameinfull,ratherthansimplyuseinitials."Butthe `!" writtenruleshadalreadyprovidedtheinterpretationof"certify"asmeaningexactly #`$ this: $ & 8  Thecirculatorofthecandidatenominatingpetitionmustsignthe p&!( _circulator_scertification,statingthat:H'")H!H!   8 p "Iherebycertifyeverypersonwhosignedthissheetdidsoin (H$+ mypresenceandIbelieveeachpersonisaqualifiedvoterof ) %, thestateofOregon."*%-phph  +&. 8  Thecirculatorshallcompletethedatewhenthecertificationissigned  andshallnotcollectanyadditionalsignaturesonthatsheetafterdating  thecertification.`H!H! 2004StateCandidate'sManual:IndividualElectors[ER86etseq.].Thus, ` Respondenthadalreadypubliclyinterpretedanddefined"certify"asthecirculator   signinganddatingasheetwiththeprescribedcertificationlanguage.Every p  rejectedsheetfullycompliedwiththeserequirements.  p    TheuncontestedtestimonyattrialwasthatRespondentrejectedthefollowing   numbersofverifiedvotersignaturesonsheetssignedbythenamed_circulators_,   onlybecausetheirsignatures"appearedtobeinitials,"eventhougheveryoneof 0  themsubmittedswornaffidavitsshowingthatwhat"appearedtobeinitials"wasin 0 facttheirnormalsignaturesonimportantdocuments,suchasdriverslicensesand  SocialSecuritycards.RecallthatNaderwasallegedlyshortbyonly218 @  signatures. @ o & J  * ddO dd O dd dd  (#(#,td ,8td,td",td",tt"+  F7 0T$00FCirculator [L1T"#0#$0$ 00[NumberofVerified T VoterSignatures  Rejected [L1P"#0#$0$ 00[Reason [L1T"#0#$0$ 00[SheetsReference T (tabsofexhibitsto  _Aff_.Travis_Diskin_) _L1P"#0#$0$ 00_Affidavit T  Reference j[< " T$ 0 #0#$0$ T$00jTimothyJohnson I:(n #0#$0$ 00I41 I:(n #0#$0$ 00Iinitials I:(n #0#$0$ 00ITabA n _SER_Ԅ27,3450_    8      _ M:(d#0#$0$ 00M_SER_Ԅ22 aR3n T$  #0#$0$ T$00a_JuanJuan_ԀWong I:(2 #0#$0$ 00I117 I:(2 #0#$0$ 00Iinitials I:(2 #0#$0$ 00ITabH 2  _SER_Ԅ217+ M:( (#0#$0$ 00M_SER_Ԅ375 aR32  T$  #0#$0$ T$00aRonald_Rosenloff_ I:( F#0#$0$ 00I160 I:( F#0#$0$ 00Iinitials I:( F#0#$0$ 00ITabF  F _SER_Ԁ110+ M:( #0#$0$ 00M_SER_Ԅ395_!   9      _ aR3 F T$  #0#$0$ T$00aTerence_Constancio_ I:( #0#$0$ 00I70 I:( #0#$0$ 00I"looked   inconsistent" I:(`  #0#$0$ 00ITabD  ! _SER_Ԅ51+ M:(` "#0#$0$ 00M_SER_Ԅ373"   10      aR3 # T$  #0#$0$ hT$00avarious I:(~ $#0#$0$ 00I69 I:(~ %#0#$0$ 00Icorrectedminor ~ & datingerrors I:($t '#0#$0$ 00ITabE ~ ( _SER_Ԅ78+ M:($t )#0#$0$ 00MNA_#@   11      _ cR3~ * T$ h #0#$0$ T$00c !2 totals bQ(B +#0#$0$  @000b457 bQ?B ,0  @ #0#$0$ 00b K:(B -#0#$0$ 00K M:(B .#0#$0$ 00MC97B / T$  #0#$0$ C'JPXvX oThus,intheseinstancesalone,Respondentremovedmorethandoublethealleged218 X 1 signatureNadershortfall.Thisdoesnotincludeanyofthesignaturesheetsrejectedat 83 thecountylevel,atRespondent'sorders(usingthesame"unwrittenrules"regarding x5 circulatorsignaturesanddates). X7   Respondent(pp.911)thenoftenreferstotheneedfor_circulators_Ԁto"show 9 compliancewith"andnot"violate"the"certificationrequirement."Theuncontested (x; evidenceisthattherejectedsheetswereinfullcompliancewiththewrittenrules.They = wererejectedpursuanttoRespondent's"unwrittenrules,"aseventheOregonSupreme H? Courtrecognized(_SER_Ԅ429]. (A   h C         2   B  .3  0 p THETRIALCOURTDIDNOTDISMISSTHECONSTITUTIONALCLAIMS  WITHPREJUDICE. g xp(#p(#   Respondent(p.3)incorrectlystatesthatMarionCountyCircuitCourt"dismissed X withprejudice"allofPlaintiffs'claims,includingtheconstitutionalones,exceptthe  FourthClaim.Thisisnotthecase.Instead,thatcourt'sOpinionandOrderconcluded ( x (ER113),"ItisunnecessarytoreachPlaintiffs'additionalconstitutionalclaimsasthe    statutoryclaimsare_dispositive_Ԁintheirfavor."Further,theJudgment(ER115)doesnot H   dismissanyoftheconstitutionalclaimswithprejudiceandspecificallynotedthatitwas (  not"reachingconstitutionalclaims."ER116. h     2   III  .3  0  THEOREGONSUPREMECOURT'SCONSTITUTIONALANALYSISWAS  INCORRECT. k (#(#   RegardingtheOregonSupremeCourt'sapproachtotheconstitutionalclaims,its h decisionconcluded[_SER_Ԁ440]thatApplicants'rightsundertheU.S.Constitutionwere  notviolated,because,"likeallpoliticalparticipants,"theymust"complywiththe 8 pertinentsignaturegatheringprocedures,thatOregonlawrequires."Thatanalysis  wouldallowaStatetoimposeanyrequirementitmaychoose,regardlessofitseffect X ontheconstitutionalrightsofvoters,_circulators_,andcandidates.Thereisnosupport 8 _forthispropositioninfederalcaselaw.Asfortheanalysisof Buckleyv.American x! ConstitutionalLawFound. ,525U.S.182,119S.Ct.636,142L.Ed.2d599(1999)  X# [hereinafter" ACLF "],thefactthatthiscourtin ACLF foundsomeofColorado's !% unchallengedstatutoryrequirementsasnotinviolationtheU.S.Constitutionwashardly (#x' surprisingandcertainlydoesnotmeanthatallstatutoryrequirements,nomatterwhat $ ) theyare,areimmunefromconstitutionalattack.Inthiscase,Applicantssubmittedfar H&!+ morethanenoughverifiedvotersignatures,withoutviolatinganyOregonstatute '(#- whatever(andwithoutviolatinganywrittenrules,either).TheOregonSupremeCourt h)$/ thenmentionsfraudbutneitherthatCourt,norRespondent,evenidentifiesthe *H&1 potentialfraudthatisinanywaycounteredbyapplicationofthe"unwrittenrules"orof  thesequentialsheetnumberingrequirement. @   TheOregonSupremeCourtsimplyfailedtoaddressthesevereburdenplaced   uponApplicantsbytheretroactiveapplicationofunwrittenrulesandbytheapplication `  ofthesequentialsheetnumberingrequirement,despiteadvicefromtheSecretaryof  @ Statetodiscontinuesuchnumberinglateinthesignaturedrive.NordidthatCourteven    addresswhethertheOregonschemeisnarrowlytailoredtoachievewhateverstate `  interestcouldhavebeenidentified.Thus,indeedtheOregonSupremeCourtmisstated   theapplicableconstitutionallawandrenderedadecisioninconflictwithgoverning 0  precedentoftheUnitedStatesSupremeCourt.Thiscasealsoraisesimportantissues  offederalconstitutionallawhavingsignificantpracticalconsequence.Ifindependent P candidatesmustbemindreadersinordertocomplywith"unwrittenrules"adoptedby 0 governmentofficials,thereisnopracticalwayforthemtorunforoffice. p    2   IV  .3  0  THEEQUALPROTECTIONCLAIMISNOTNEW. tx (#(#   Respondentclaims(p.15)thatourdiscussionofequalprotectionisanew X constitutionalclaim,notraisedbelow.Infact,Applicants'originalfiling("Appeal")with 8 theCircuitCourtreferstotheFifthAmendment,withoutreferringspecificallytodue x! processorequalprotection.Further,ourSeventhClaimiscouchedintermsof  X# discrimination,thehallmarkofanequalprotectionclaim.Inaddition,ouronlyfilingwith !% theOregonSupremeCourt,thePlaintiffs'MemoranduminOpposition[toDefendant's (#x' PetitionforIssuanceofanAlternativeorPeremptoryWritofMandamus](September $ ) 17,2004)specificallystated(p.1): H&!+ 8  Further,hisactionviolatestherightsofPlaintiffstoexercisetheirrightsto '(#- freespeechandassembly,topeaceablypetitionthegovernment,toexercise (#. theirrightsasregisteredOregonelectors(includingtherighttosignpetitions h)$/ tonominatecandidatesforpublicoffice),andtotheapplicationofdue 0*%0 processandequalprotectionoflawundertheFifthAmendment,made *H&1 applicabletostateactionbytheFourteenthAmendment.+'2H!H! ЇWeadmit,however,thatouranalysisofequalprotectionpresentedtothisCourthas  improved. @ *$% ddtd 8td8td"td"tt"(#(#,dd ,dd , dd +  H7 HDated:September27,2004  MarkMcDougal MC( @ ##$$ M E4 ##$$ ERespectfullySubmitted,   DanielW.Meek e[3 @  ##$$ 1eMARKMcDOUGAL   Kafoury&McDougal   320S.W.StarkStreet H  Suite202 `  (503)22426470 P voice( P UP U (503)22426730 P fax P UP U mcdougal@kafourymcdougal.com h  OfAttorneysforPlaintiffs >4H ##$$ > >4 ##$$ >DANIELW.MEEK   OSBNo.79124   10949S.W.4thAvenue H  Portland,OR97219 `  (503)29390210  voice( (#(# (503)29390990  fax (#(# dan@meek.net h  OfAttorneysforPlaintiffs=31H ! 1  ##$$ =_  ! Ѐ @5CERTIFICATEOFSERVICE   IherebycertifythatIservedtheforegoingREPLYOFAPPLICANTSONAPPLICATION @ FORSTAYOFOREGONSUPREMECOURTORDER,PENDINGCERTIORARI X REVIEW&ԀbydepositingwiththeUnitedStatesPostalService,firstclasspostage  prepaid,atruecopytotheattorneyslistedbelow:  KatherineGeorges ( l  AssistantAttorneyGeneral  4  400JusticeBuilding    Salem,OR97310   Roy_Pulvers_ T  Lindsay,Hart,Neil_Weigler_   1300S.W.5thAvenue#3400   Portland,OR97201 h  IalsocertifythatIemailedtheforegoingdocumentinPDFformattothefollowingemail  addresses:  KayeMcDonald 0 kaye.mcdonald@doj.state.or.us \ David_Leith_0 P 00 P (#P (#david.Leith@state.or.us$0 (#0 (# DonMarmaduke0 0 don@Tonkon.com0 (#0 (# KatherineGeorges0 0 kate.georges@doj.state.or.usp0 (#0 (# Margaret_Olney_ P 0 0 margaret@sgdo.com8|0 (#0 (# MarkMcDougal0 0 mcdougal@kafourymcdougal.comD0 (#0 (# RoyE._Pulvers_0 P 00 P (#P (#rpulvers@lindsayhart.com 0 (#0 (# Dated:September27,2004@@ ," @@DanielMeek @% @@__________________________  L& @@DanielW.Meek  '