American Samoa VotingSamoa-American vote
U.S. judge Joan B. Gottschall had concentrated her ruling on American Samoa, which she says has "a one-of-a-kind relation with the United States" and the reasons why the country will remain on an Illinois electoral bill for absent electors abroad. Then Gottschall looked for commentaries and argumentation in the second and last part of the process, which concentrates on the handling of American Samoa under the Illinois Military Oversea Voter Empowerment Act (MOVE).
Under the Act, former Illinois citizens who are enrolled electors may cast their votes by roll-call votes in state elections if they live in American Samoa - but not in other U.S. territories. However, the Act does not allow former Illinois citizens to do so. Claimants claimed that the MOVE status violated their equivalent property by ruling out former Illinois constituents now residing in Puerto Rico, Guam and the U.S. Virgin Islands.
In addition, the claimants allege that Illinois' MOVE and the UOCAVA violate their material right to international travelling. Whilst the MOVE constitution reflected the 1979 United States Samoa Act on Overseas Citizens' Voting Rights, which American Samoa regarded as a strange land, Illinois never changed the MOVE Act when the 1979 Act was overturned by Congress and superseded by a new Unified and Overseas Citizens' Voting Act (UOCAVA) in 1986, Gottschall's November 2006 ruling stated.
If the MOVE Act were changed to mirror the new 1986 Act, it would consider American Samoa as US territories, and that would prohibit former Illinois citizens who live in American Samoa from voting in Illinois federation ballots. "With Illinois MOVE, former Illinois citizens who live in American Samoa can cast postal votes.
If Illinois had revised its electoral legislation to reflect the new UOCAVA after the OCVRA was repealed in 1986, these Samoa citizens would have forfeited their right to postal vote," Gottschall commented. According only to the civil suitants, the Illinois legislation did not offer any warrant for its ranking in favour of former Illinois residents who live in American Samoa, the Northern Marines (NMI) or in a strange land.
The MOVE Act also argues that it favours the handling of former Illinois residents in American Samoa, but such a move does not promote the legitimacy of the state interest. Even the allegedly singular American Samoa as" more like a strange country" - as mentioned by the lower courts - does not support the regulations of MOVE.
You say that this excuse is little more than an observance that the Samoa-American administration wants to discriminate. Civil suitants continued to notice his contradiction with the lower court's argumentation why Illinois should be allowed to stretch the voice to American Samoa - but not the other territories - because UOCAVA is only setting a floor on which the states are free to construct in the extension of the voting right to former nationals living in other territories.
There is no date on federally filed documents as to when the appellate tribunal will rule on whether to continue with the appeal or not. However, while American Samoa and other US territory cannot support the US presidency in domestic election, citizens have one say when it comes to choosing a country to hold the presidency. In the Caucasus, for example, last year the regions were kept to choose Republic and Democratic aspirants.