New Jersey Court Won't Block Electronic Voting

SilentChris writes "A New Jersey court has denied an e-voting ban request made by Rutgers University on behalf of a voter. The plantifs argued the machines 'are "inherently insecure" and do not offer a backup paper record of each vote, which means there is no way to verify ballots if there were a recount' (much the same as arguments made on Slashdot). The court responded by saying the 'alternative is worse. Every professional agrees that a paper ballot is a formula for disaster'. Despite the setback, the case hasn't been officially dismissed. However, the plantiffs will need to take action today to have an effect on next week's presidential election."

Comments

Do they?

[Troed]

Every professional agrees that a paper ballot is a formula for disaster'

Except ... it works in the rest of the world - even in areas larger than the USA.

Ballot Box Observers

[lynx_user_abroad]

One wonders if one could make a persuasive argument that electronic voting booths are illegal because they deny third parties an opportunity to observe the ballot box?

Does anyone know of any state law (NJ or otherwise) which guarantees independent observers the right to verify the "ballot box" is empty before voting begins, to observe the box at all times during vote casting, verify that the box is sealed after election is closed, and observe the counting of the votes post-election? If so, I think an electronic ballot box would fail all those tests.