80 [92 Op. Att’y
EL EC TI ONS
B ALLOTS

– V OTI NG

– A BSE NTEE B ALLOT O AT H S HOUL D B E M ODI FI E D T O I N C O R PORA TE C OND I T I ONS FOR U SE OF A BSE NTEE B ALLOT B Y T RA CKI NG C ONS T I T UT I ONA L L AN GUA GE

J ul y18, 2007

Li nda Lam one A dm i nis t r at or, M

ar yl and St at e Board of

E l ect i ons
Y ou have r eques t ed our opi ni on conce r ni ng t he w or di ng of t he
o ath co m p l et ed bya vot erw ho cas t s an abs ent ee ba l l ot

. Y our ques t i on i s pr om pt ed byt he C our t of A ppeal s deci s i on i n Lam one v. C ap ozzi , 3 9 6 M d . 5 3 , 9 1 2 A .2 d 6 7 4 (2 0 0 6 ), w h ich h e ld th a t a s tatu te aut hor i zi ng vot i ng i n advanc e of el ect i on dayvi ol at ed t he M ar y l and C o n s t i t u t i o n

. I n t h e c o u r s e o f t h a t d e c i s i o n , t h e Cou r t c o ns t r ued A r t i cl e I , §3, t he cons t i t ut i onal pr ovisi o n aut hor i zi ng abs ent ee bal l ot s , t o per tai n o n ly t o “‘ abs ent ’ vot er s , not t hos e w ho fi nd t he
v o tin g d a yto b e in c o n v e n ie n t.”
I n our opi ni on, t he abs ent ee ba l l ot oat h s houl d t r ack the lan g u a g e o f

A rticle I, § 3 – th a t is, the v o te r s h o u ld b e re q u ire d to sw e a r or a f

f irm th a t h e o r sh e w ill b e a b se n t o r w ill b e u n a b le to v o te i n per s on on el ect i on day

. I f an a m endment of A r t i cl e I , §3 pas s ed by t he G eneral A ssem blyat i t s 200 7 sessi on i s r at i fi ed b yt he v oter s, t he abs ent ee ba l l ot for m s s houl d be amended t o t r ack the amended pr ovisi o n or anyl egi s l at i on gover ni ng abs ent ee ba l l ot s cons i s t ent w ith th a t p ro v is io n

. I Backg r ound
A. Cons ti t uti ona l

Bas is f orAbs e nte e Voting
T he M ar y l and C ons t i t ut ion r ecogni zes t w o m et hods of
e x e rc isin g th e rig h t to v o te. T h e f irst m e th o d , b y c a stin g a b a llo t in per s on, i s expr es s l ypr ovi ded fori n A r t i cl e I , §1

. T hatpr ovi s i on defi nes w ho m ayvot e and w her e he ors he mayvot e:Ge n. 80] 81

The 1864 Constitution pe rmitted absente e voting by soldiers fighting 1 for the Union in the Civi l War. Howe ver, that authorization was omitted when the c urre nt Constitution wa s adopted in 1867. TheConstitution was amende d in 1918 to permit the Genera l Assembly to allow absente e voting by members o f th e arm ed forces. Chapte r 20, L aws of Ma ryland 1918, ratifi ed November 5 , 1 918. Thirty-five year s later, that provision was expanded to authorize absente e votingby any voter who would be abse nt from h i s or her

elec tion district on ele ction day . Chapter 480, L aws of M aryland 1953, ratifi ed N o v e mb e r 2 , 1 9 5 4

. A f e w ye ar s late r , the provision was expanded to cove r voters who would be in the district, but hospitaliz ed or be dridden on e lecti o nday . Chapter 100, L aws of Maryland 1956, ra ti

fi ed November

6, 1956. Twenty

year s later, the provision was ame nded to i ts curr ent form – which simply provides that absente e votingmay

be madeavailable to any voter who is “a

bsent at the time of any

elec tion” or “una

ble to vote per sonally .” Chapter 881, L aws of Mar yland 1974, ratifi ed

November

5, 1974. (A subsequent ame ndment re c od if ie d the pr ov isi on from its orig inal e na c tme nt a s Ar tic le I , §1 A, to Article I , §3. Chapter 681, L aws of Ma ryland 1977, ratifi ed

November

7, 1978). As explained later in the text , the L eg islature rece ntly approve d an amendment of Article I , §3, which will be prese nted to the vot er s for ratifica tion in the 2008 election. A l l el ect i ons s hal l be bybal l ot

. E ver yci t i zen of t he U ni t ed St at es , of t he age of 18 y ear s or upw ar ds , w ho i s a r es i dentof t he St at e as of t he t i m e fort he cl os i ng of r egi s t r at i on next p re c e d in g th e e lec tio n , sh a ll b e e n tit led to v o te i n t he w ar d or el ect i on di s t r i cti n w hi ch he
r es i des atal l el ect i ons t o be hel d i n t hi s St at e. A per s on once e nt i t l ed t o vot e i n anyel ect i on di s t r i ct , s hal l be ent i t l ed t o vot e t her e unt i l he
s hal l have a cqui r ed a r es i dence i n anot her di s t r i ctof w ar d i n t hi s St at e.
T h e se c o n d m e th o d o f

v o tin g , sa n c tio n e d b yth e c u rre n t S tate C ons t i t ut i on s i nce 1918, i s byabs ent ee ba l l ot

. T he C ons t i t ut i on 1 does not m andat e an ab sen t ee ba l l ot , but aut hor i zes t he G ener al A ssem blyt o p rovi de fo r i t

. A rt i cl e I, §3 provides:

T he G ener al A s s embl yof M ar y l and s hal l have pow er t o pr ovi de by s ui t abl e enac t m ent for vot i ng byqual i fi ed vo ters of t he St at e of M ar y land w ho ar e abs entatt he t i m e of a ny el ect i on i n w hi ch t hey ar e ent i t l ed t o vot e and82 [92 Op. Att’y

Chapter 78, L aws of Ma

ryland 1918. 2 Chapter 6, L aws of Ma ryland 2006. 3
See EL§9-308 (providing that a person who by

rea son of disability

or 4 inability to rea d or write needs assistance in c astingballot may be assisted by an individual who executes a cer tificate pr escribed by

the SBE)

. fo r vo ti n g b yo th er q u ali fied v o ters w h o are unabl e t o vot e per s onal l y and for t he m anner i n w hi ch and t he t i m e and pl ace atw hi ch s uch absent voter s m a y v ote, and for t he can vass and return of

t heirvo t es.
T he C our t of A ppeal s has r eferred to abs ent ee vot i ng as a “s peci al pr i vi l ege” acc or ded byt he Legi s l atur e w hi ch i s “not s har ed by ot her vot er s – t he pr i vi l ege of havi n g t hei r vot e counteven though
r ece i ved byt he el ect i on offi ci al s aft er t he pol l s have c l os ed. ” L a mb
v. H am m ond , 3 0 8 M d . 2 8 6 , 3 0 9 -1 0 , 5 1 8 A .2 d 1 0 5 7 (1 9 8 7 ).
B. I mple m e ntati on o

f Abs e nte e Voting
1. B ef ore 2006
T he St at e el ect i on l aw has m ade pr ovi s i on forabs ent ee vot i ng s i nce 1918 and w as m os t r ece nt l yamended i n 2006. T he G ener al

2 3 A ss e m b lyh a s d ire c ted th e S tate B o a rd o f E lec tio n s (“ S B E ” ) to
es t abl i s h gui del i nes fort he adm i ni s t r at i on of abs ent ee vot i ng byt he l ocal boar ds of el ect i on w i t hi n t he s t atut or ypar amet er s

. A nnot at ed C ode of M ar y l and, E lect i on L aw A r t i cl e ( “EL ”) , §9- 303. For t hat purpos e, t he SB E has d ev el oped a number of for m s , i ncl udi ng an a p p l i c a t i o n f

o r t h e v o t e r t o c o mpl e t e a n d r e t u r n , a n o at h t o be compl et ed w i t h t he ab sen tee ba l l ot i t s el f, and a c er t i fi cat e of a p erso n assisti n g the a b sen tee v o ter. S e e , e .g ., C O M A R 33. 11. 02. 02 4 (p ro v id in g th a t a n a p p lica tio n f o r an a b se n tee b a llo t is to b e m a d e to a l ocal boar d on a for m pr es cr i bed bySB E or pr ovi ded underfede r al la w ).
B efor e t he 2006 st atut or y amendm ent , an i ndi vi dual appl y i ng f o r a n a b se n tee b a llo t co u ld v o te a b se n tee o n ly f o r o n e o f

th e six
re a so n s liste d in th e sta tu te: a b se n c e o n e lec tio n d a yf ro m th e c o u n ty i n w hi ch t he vot erw as r egi s t er ed; i nabi l i t y t o go t o t he pol l i ng pl ace beca us e of acc i dent , i l l nes s , or phy s i cal di s abi l i t y ; confi nement i n an i n s t i t u t i o n ; d e a t h o r s e r i o u s i l l n e s s i n t h e v o t e r ’ s i m m e d i a t e f a m i l y;Ge n. 80] 83

For example, f

ederal law a

uthorizes absenteevoting by members of

the 5 uniformed se rvice s and other vote rs who are out of th e co un try

. See42 U.S.C. §1973ff et seq. (Unifor med and Ove rsea s Citi zens Absentee Voting A ct). At one time, the application for an a bsen t ee b al l ot had to contain an 6 aff idavit that provided the infor mat i o n un der pe nalty

of per jury . The Gene ral Asse mbly

eliminated that requirement in 1996. Chapter 2, L aws of Mar yland 1996. Se e Pe lag

atti v

. Bd

. ofSu pe rv iso rs o

f Ca lv e rt C

ou nty , 343 Md. 425, 440 n.14, 682 A.2d 237 (1996). stu d e n t sta tu s; a n d a b se n c e b e c a u se o f e m p lo y m e n t b yth e S tate B o a rd o r lo c a l b o a rd

. See f o rm e r E L § 9 -3 0 4 (a ) (2 0 0 3 ); see al so EL § 1 0 -1 0 2

. T h e s ta tu te a lso a llo w e d a v o ter to v o te a b se n tee if
au tho ri ze d u n d er f

ed era l l aw

. E L § 9 -30 4 (b). 5

A n in d iv id u a l a p p ly in g f o r an a b se n tee b a llo t w a s re q u ire d to cer t i fyt hathe ors he w as qual i fi ed t o cas t an abs ent ee ba l l ot forone o r m o re o f

th e s ta tu to ry re a s o n s

. See E L §9- 305 ( 2003)

. T he 6
a p p lica tio n re a d in p e rtin e n t p a rt:

T o q uali fyf

o r an ab sent ee ball ot, y ou m ust cer t i fybyy our s i gnatur e t hat o n e o r m or e of th e f o llo w in g s ta te m e n ts is o r w ill b e tr u e . I am unabl e t o go t o t he pol l s , b ecaus e on e l e c t i o n d a y:
1

. I m ay be ab s e n t f r o m my c o u n t y of
r egi s t r at i on.
2. I am suffer i ng fr om an a c c i de nt , i l l ness, o r p h ys i c a l d i s a b i l i t y.
3

. I am conf

ined in o r r es t r i ct ed t o an i ns t i t ut i on.
4. I am at t end i ng t o a deat h o r ser i ou s i l l ness i n m y f a m i l y.
5

. I have a cade m i c obl i gat i ons at an i n s t i t u t i o n o f h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n o u t s i d e my p r e c i n c t , b u t wi t h i n my c o u n t yof
r egi s t r at i on.84 [92 Op. Att’y

Th is law, wh ic h w a s p a sse d b y theL e g isl atur e a s H ou seB ill62 2 in 7 2005, was vetoed by

the Gover

nor on policy

grounds. SeeVeto L etter of Gover nor Robert L . Ehrlich, Jr. concer ning H ouse B ill 622 (May 20, 2005), 2005 Ve toed Bills and Messag es at pp. 636-37. At its nex t session, the Gene ral Asse mbly

overrode that veto. 6. I am em pl oy ed byt he B oar d of El ect i ons a n d m u st b e a b se n t f

ro m th e p re c in c t in
w hi ch I am re gi s t er ed.
7. I am age 65 or ol der and m y pol l i ng pl ace i s i nacc es s i bl e.
A ft err ece i vi ng and compl et i ng t he abs ent ee b all ot , t he vot er w as t o r etur n i t i n a bal l ot envel ope cont ai ni ng an oath compl et ed by t he vot er

. E L §9- 310( c)

. T hat oat h r ei t er at ed t hatt he vot ers at i s fi ed t he s t atut or yr equi r ement s forabs ent ee vot i ng. I t s t at ed:

U nderpenal t yo f per

j ur y , I her ebys w ear ( or aff i r m ) t hatI am qual ifi ed t o vot e i n t he el ect i on as s t at ed in m yabs ent ee ba l l ot appl i cat i on; t hat I have r eas on t o bel i eve that I w i l l be unabl e t o vot e i n per so n on el ect i on day and am ent i t l ed t o vot e by abs ent ee ba l l ot underM ar y l and el ect i on l aw s or t he U ni for m ed and O ver s eas C i t i zens A bs ent ee V ot i ng A ct ; and t hat I have not vot ed and do not i nt end t o vot e el s ew her e i n t hi s el ect i on. I vot ed t he encl os ed bal l ot and m ai l ed it no la te r t h a n th e d a yb e f

o re th e e le c tio n

. 2. 2006 L egi s l at i on
I n 2 0 0 6 , t h e Ge n e r a l As s e mb l y s u b s t a n t i a l l y r e wr o t e t h e l a ws gover ni ng abs ent ee ba l l ot s

. C hapter 6 , L aw s of M ar y l and 2006. 7 T he bi ll w as ent i t l ed “A bs ent ee V ot i ng on D emand” and w as under s t ood t o di s pens e w i t h t he el i gi bi l i t y r equi r ement s forus i ng an ab sen tee b a llo t. See Fi s cal and Pol i cyN ot e t o H ous e B i l l 622 ( Febr uar y15, 2005)

. I n par t i cul ar , i t el i m i nat ed t he spec i fi c l i s t of
r eas ons forvot i ng abs ent ee; nor di d i t r equi r e a vot ert o gi ve any re a s o n in th e a p p lic a tio n f o r v o tin g a b s e n te e

. See E L §9- 305 ( 2003, 2 0 0 6 C u m

. S u p p

. ). A s am en d ed , E L § 9 -30 4 sim p ly stat ed that “[ a]n i ndi vi dual m ay vot e by abs ent ee bal l ot exce pt t o t he ex te nt pr eempt ed underan appl i cabl e fe der al l aw

. ”Ge n. 80] 85

The L eg islature orig inally passed the bill in 2005 as Senate B ill 478. 8 The Gove rnor ve toed the bill. SeeV e t o Le tt e r o f G o v e rn o r R o b e rtL. Ehrl ic h, Jr. c on c e rn ing Se nate B ill 47 8 (M ay 20 , 2 00 5) , 2 00 5 V e toe d B ill s and Me ssa g e s at pp. 15 7- 58 . Theve to w a s o ve rridd e n a nd thebil l be c ame Cha pte r 5 of the20 06 se ssi on

. Duri ng that same se ssi on , th e orig inal e arl y voting leg islation wa s amende d, and the amendment was a lso vetoed by the Gover

nor. SeeVeto L etter of Gover nor Robert L . Ehrl i ch , J r. conce rningHouse B ill 1368 (May 2 0 , 2 0 05), 2006 Ve toed B ills and Messag es at p p

. 890-93. That ve to was also over ridden by

the L eg islature. Chapter

61, L aws of Ma

ryland 2006. C o n sist en t w ith the u n d erstan d ing o f th e statut o ry m o d if ica tio n s, S B E re v ise d th e a b se n tee b a llo t ap p lica tio n to d e lete t he l i s t of s peci fi c r eas ons forvot i ng abs ent ee. T he vot erw as no l ongerr equi r ed t o cer t i fy t hat he or she w oul d be unabl e t o go t o t he pol l s on el ect i on day

. SB E al s o devel oped t he curr entver s i on of t he abs ent ee ba l l ot oat h, w hi ch r equi r es onl yt hatt he vot ers w earor affir m t hat he or she i s “qu al i fi ed t o vote i n t he el ect i on , and

. . . [has]
n o t v o te d a n d [ d o e s ] n o t in te n d to v o te e ls e w h e re in th is e le c tio n .”
C
. T he Capozz iD eci

s i on
In 2 0 0 6 , the G en era l A ssem b lyen ac ted, ov er the G o v ern o r’s
v e to e s, a m e n d m e n ts to th e S tate e lec tio n law th a t au th o riz e d e a rly vot i ng – i.e

. , a vot ercoul d vot e ats peci fi ed pol l i ng pl ace s , not n e c e ss a rilyin th e v o ter ’s o w n d istric t, fo r a s p e c if ied p e rio d in advance o f el ect i on dayw i t hout s at i s fy i ng anys peci al cr i t er i a. C hapt er s 5, 61, L aw s of M ar y l and 2006, codi fi ed atE L §10- 301. 1. 8 T he l egi s l at i on “w as i nt ended t o g ive M ar y l and vot er s a s econd
a lte rn a tiv e to in -p e rs o n b a llo tin g , a b s e n te e v o tin g b e in g th e o th e r.” C ap ozzi , 3 9 6 M d . a t 6 4

. Th e e a r l yv o t i n g l a w wa s c h a l l e n g e d i n c o u r t b ys o me in d iv id u a l v o ter s w h o a rg u e d th a t itv io late d v a rio u s S tate cons t i t ut i onal pr ovi s i ons

. B eca use o f t he i m pendi ng el ect i on, t he
c a se w a s e x p e d ited a n d , o n A u g u st 25 , 2 0 0 6 , th e C o u rt o f A p p e a ls aff i r me d a c i r c u i t c o u r t o r d e r t h a t d e c l a r e d t h e e a r l y v o t i n g l aw u n c o n s titu tio n a l a n d v o id

. L am on e v. C ap ozzi , 394 M d. 305, 905 A. 2 d 8 4 1 ( 2 0 0 6 )

. Th e Cou r t d i d n o t i s s u e a n o p i n i o n a t t h a t t i me and t hus , i t w as not cl earw hat , i f any , i m pl i cat i o n s t he dec i s i on mi g h t h a v e f

o r h o w t h e S t a t e c o n d u c t s a b s e n t e e b a l l o t i n g

. On D ece m ber11, 2006, t he C our t i s s ued an opi ni on exp lai ni ng t he
re a s o n in g f

o r i ts d e c is io n

. Lamone v

. Capoz zi , 396 M d. 53, 91286 [92 Op. Att’y

The Court also held that primary elec t i o n s ar e included within the 9 meaningof “at all elec tions to be held in this St ate”in Article I , §1. 396 Md . at 89 . T hu s, its ho ldi ng s c on c e rninge arl y vo tin ga lso e xten de d to prima ry e le c tio ns

. A

. 2d 674 ( 2006)

. I n our vi ew , t hatr ea so n i ng aff ect s t he i mp l e me n t a t i o n o f

t h e a b s e n t e e b a l l o tl a w.
I n expl ai ni ng i t s d e ci s i on, t he C our t of A ppeal s emphasi zed the i m p o rt an ce of

t he pl ai n l anguage pr i nci pl e of c ons t i t ut i onal in te rp re ta tio n

. C ap ozzi , 396 M d. at 72- 73. T he C our t hel d t hatt he p ro v isio n o f th e e a r lyv o tin g law a u th o riz in g v o ter s to c a st b a llo ts dur i ng t he w eek be for e el ect i on day “i s cl ear l y i ncons i s t ent w i t h t he
w or ds o f

, a n d t h e p l a i n me a n i n g o f Ar t i c l e XV , § 7 a n d t h e ot her
cons t i t ut i onal pr ovi s i ons t hatdes i gnat e t he ‘ T ues daynextaft ert he fi r s t M ondayof N ovember , ’ as t he dat e of the gener al el ect i on. ” I d.
a t 7 6 . T h e C o u rt re a d § 7 to re q u ir e th a t “th e e lec tio n sh a ll b e h e ld
on a s peci fi c day

. . . [and ] anys t atut e t hatal l ow s fora bal l ot t o be
cas t befor e t he pr es cr i bed daym us t be i n der ogat i on of t he C ons t i t ut i on. ” Id

. at 83 (em p h asis in o ri g inal).
T h e C o u rtalso n arro w ly interpre ted t h e l an g u ag e o f A rt icl e I, §1 t hats t at es t hata vot er“i s ent i t l ed t o vot e i n t he w ar d or el ect i on di s t r i cti n w hi ch he r esid es.

. . . ” N ot i ng t hatt he ea r l yvot i ng l aw w oul d enabl e an i ndi vi dual t o vot e out s i de of t he vot er ’ s di s t r i ctor w ard, t he C ou rtheld t hat the st at ute vi olat ed A rt i cl e I, §1 , becau se “[ w ]e v iew th e lang u ag e in A rt icl e I, §1 , as a m an d atory re q u ir e m e n t, n o t a s a m e re ‘e n title m e n t,’ c a p a b le o f b e in g w a iv e d .” Id

. at85- 86. 9

F inally , t he C our t hel d t hatear l yvot i ng i s not a for m of ab sen tee vo ti n g au tho ri ze d b y A rt icl e I, § 3

. Itstat ed that “A rt icl e I, § 3 c lea rlyin d ica tes th a t th e in a b ili tyto v o te p e rso n a ll y a p p lies to

‘ abs ent ’ vot er s , not t hos e w ho fi nd t he vot i ng d ay to be i nconveni ent

. ” Id

. at90- 91.
D
. P ending C onstit uti onal A m endm ent

C oncer ni ng A bs entee Voting
I n r es pons e t o t he C ap ozzi d e c isio n , the G e n e ra l A ss e m b lyin its 2 0 0 7 se ss io n p a ss e d a c o n stitu tio n a l am e n d m e n t th a t w o u ld aut hor i ze t he L egi s l atur e t o pr ovi de for ear l y vot i ng as an al t er nat i ve w ay of cas t i ng bal l ot s i n M ar y l and. C hapt er 513, L aw s of M ar y l andGe n. 80] 87

Additions made by the amendment a re indicated by

capitals; dele tions 10
areindic ate d b y

br a c ke ts.
In addition, Article I , §1 of the State Constitution would beamende d 11
a s f oll ow s:
(continued...) 2007. U ndert he pr oposed am endm ent , A r t i cl e I , §3 w oul d be
a me n d e d a s f

o l l o ws :

10 ( A ) T h e G en era l A ssem b ly [of M ar y l and] s hal l have TH E pow ert o pr ovi de bys ui table enact m entforvot i ng byqual i fi ed vot er s of t he St at e of M ar y l and w ho ar e abs ent a t the ti m e o f a n yelec ti o n in w h ich th ey are en ti tl ed t o vot e [a nd] , forvot i ng byot her q u a lif ie d v o ter s w h o a re u n a b le to v o te p e r s o na l l y , O R FO R VOTI NG BY QUAL I F I E D V O T E RS WHO M I GHT OTHERW I S E CHOOS E T O VO TE BY A B S E N T E E B A L L O T , an d f o r th e m a n n e r in
w hi ch and the t i m e and p l ace atw hi ch s uch [absen t ] vot ers m ayvo t e, and for t he can vass and return of

t heirvo t es. ( B ) T H E G E N E R A L ASSEM BLY SHA LL H AV E THE POW ER TO P R O V I D E BY S U I TAB L E ENAC T M E NT A P RO CE S S T O AL L OW QUAL I F I E D VOT E RS T O VOT E AT P OL L I NG P L AC E S I N OR OUT S I DE T HE I R E L E CT I ON DI STRI CTS OR WARDS OR , DUR I NG THE T WO W E E KS I MME D I A T E L Y P R E C E D I N G AN E L E C T I O N , O N N O M O R E T H A N 10 OTH ER D AY S P RI OR TO TH E DA TES S P E CI F I E D I N T HI S CO NS T I T UT I ON.
T h e p ro p o se d a m e n d m e n t th u s a llo w s f o r a b se n tee v o tin g n o t o n ly by vot er s w ho ar e abse nt or “unabl e t o vot e per s onal l y , ” butal s o by anyvot erw ho choos es t o do s o. T he propos ed amendm entw i l l be
s ubm i t t ed t o t he vot er s for r at i fi cat i on at t he 2008 gener al el ect i on. 1188 [92 Op. Att’y

(...continued) 11 Al l e le c tio ns sh a ll beby ba llo t. [E ve ry] EX CEP T A S P R O V ID E D INS E C T IO N3 O F T H IS ARTI CLE, EV ERYc iti z en o f t heUn ite d St ate s, of t he age of 18 ye ars or up wa rd s, wh o is a resident of the S tate as of the ti me for the closing of re g istration nex t prec edingthe elec tion, shall be e nti tle d to vo te in the w ard or e le c tio n d ist

ri c t in which [he] THE CI TIZ EN resides at all elec tions to be he ld in thi s State

. A pe rs on on c e e nti tle d to vo t e i n any e l e c t i o n d i s tri c t , s h a l l b e e nt i tle d to vote there until [he] THE PERS ON shal l h ave acquir ed a r esidenc e in another elec tion district of ward in this S tate.
The State de fenda

nts reasone d that early

voting wa s authorized by 12 Article I , §3 beca

use it allows those inconvenie nced individuals who a re “unable to vote per sonally” to vote ea rlier at a more c onvenient time. Id. II
A n a ly sis
Y o u hav e asked w hethert he cu rr ent absent ee ball ot oath
s houl d be cha nged i n l i ght of t he C a p o zz i deci s i on. I n our vi ew , t he abs ent ee ba l l ot for m s s houl d be r evi s ed t o r efl ect t he cons t i t ut i onal l i m i t at i ons i ndi cat ed i n C ap ozzi

. As o u t l i n e d i n P a r t I a b o v e , t h e c u r r e n t o a t h a u t h o r i z e d b yS BE re q u ire s o n lyth a t th e v o ter c e rtify th a t h e o r sh e is q u a lifie d to v o te and has not , and w i l l not , cas t m or e t han one ba l l ot i n t he el ect i on. T he curr entappl i cat i on does not r equi re tha t t he vot erpr ovi de any
r eas on forcas t i ng an abse nt ee bal l ot or even confi r m t hat t he vot er w i l l be abs entor unabl e t o vot e p erso n all yon el ect i on day

. T he C ap ozzi deci s i on appe ars to r equi r e t hatatl eas t t he oath i ncl ude such elem ents

. I n cons t r ui ng A r t i cl e I , §3 in C ap ozzi , the C o u rt o f A p p e a ls d istin g u ish e d a b se n c e f ro m th e d istric t o r oth e r i n a b ili ty to v o te p e r s o n a l l y f

r o m me r e i n c o n v e n i e n c e

. Th e St a t e d e f e n d a n t s had
ar gued t hatt h e phra s e “una bl e t o vot e per s onal l y ” i n A r t i cl e I , §3 a p p lie s to “ a n y o n e w h o f in d s th e v o tin g tim e to b e ‘i n c o n v e n ie n t’

... d u e to w o rk h o u rs , f

a m ily o b lig a tio n s , a n d o th e r s im ila r r e a s o n s .” 12 396 M d. at90. T he C our t r ej ect ed t hat ar gum ent , hol di ng t hat“t he i nabi l i t yt o vot e per s onal l y appl i es t o ‘ abs ent ’ vot er s , not t hos e w hoGe n. 80] 89
fi nd t he vot i ng day t o be i nconveni ent

. ” Id

. a t9 0

- 9 1

. At t h e s a me t i m e, t he C our t acknow l edged thata ce r t ai n degr ee of i nconveni ence m ay m ake an i ndi vi dual abs ent and t hus el i gi bl e t o cas t an abs ent ee b a llo t. “ If th e in c o n v e n ien c e is so g re a t a s to re n d e r th e m ‘a b se n t’
a n d p re v e n t th e m f

ro m v o tin g o n th e e lec tio n d a y , the se in d iv id u a ls
can vot e us i ng an abs ent ee ba l l ot

. ” Id

. a t 9 1 . H o w e v e r, th e C o u rt d id not el abor at e on w hat degr ee of i nconveni ence m us t be pr es entfor
a n in d iv id u a l to b e c o n sid e re d “ a b se n t” a n d th e re f o re e lig ib le to v o te an ab sen tee b all o t. In a n yev en t, itap p ea rs clear tha t, in the C o u rt ’s vi ew , A r t i cl e I , §3 does not aut hor i ze a n i ndi vi dual t o vot e abs ent ee f o r a n yre a s o n a t a ll.
A lth o u g h the issu e o f a b sen tee v o tin g w as b ef o re the C o u rt onl yas i t r el at ed t o ear l y v o t i ng, t he C our t ’ s hol di ng w as bas ed on
a re j ect i on of t he i dea t hatan i ndi vi dual m ayvot e abs ent ee f or any r eas on and a r ecogni t i on t hatA r t i cl e I , § 3 l i m i t s t he ci r cumst ance s i n w hi ch an i ndi vi dual m ay cas t an abs ent ee bal l ot

. I n our vi ew , t he absentee bal l ot oat h m ust refl ect t ho se l i m i t s.
A vot er w ho s eeks an abs ent ee ba l l ot out of per s onal pr efe r en ce to v o t e i n t hatm anner– or fors om e ot herr eas on unr el at ed t o abs ence or perso n al inabi l i t yt o vot e i n per s on on el ect i on day– coul d appl yfora bal l ot and t r ut hful l yas cr ibe t o t he
cur r entver s i on of t he oat h and y et , under t he re adi ng of A r t i cl e I, §3 i n C ap ozzi , w oul d not be el i gi bl e t o cas t a abs ent ee ba l l ot

. I n l i ght of t he C our t ’ s cons t r uct i on of A r t i cl e I , § 3 , t hi s oat h s houl d not be
us ed.
I f t he curr ent ab sen tee ba l l ot for m s bas ed on t he 2006
a m e n d m e n t o f

E L § 9 -3 0 4 a re c o n stitu tio n a llyd e f icie n t, w h a t sh o u ld be us ed i n t hei r pl ace ? S houl d SB E r ever t t o t he pri or for m s fort he abs ent ee ba l l ot appl i ca ti o n and oath t hatr efe r ence d t he s ever al
r e a s o n s a l l o wed f

o r a b s e n t e e v o t i n g u n d e r t h e f o r me r v e r s i o n o f

EL § 9

- 3 0 4 ?
I n our opi ni on, t he SB E s houl d not r ever t t o t he ol d ver s i on of th e a p p l i cat i on or a versi on of the oath t hat r eferences t he spec i fic
r eas ons i n t he for m erver s i on of EL §9- 304. I n t he 2006 am endment of EL §9- 304 t he L eg is l atur e made cl eart hati t i nt ended t o m ake
a b se n tee v o tin g a v a ilab le to th e f u ll e x ten t p e rm itt e d b yth e S tate C ons t i t ut i on byel im inat i ng t he s peci fi c r eas ons forabs ence or i nabi l i t yt o vot e i n per s on t hat r es t r i ct ed t he exer ci s e of t he abs ent ee bal l ot undert he for m ers t atu te. SB E m us t gi ve ef fec t t o t hat l egi s l at i ve i n tent i n carr y i ng out t he s t atut e, s ubj ectt o any con st i t uti on al con st rai nts

.90 [92 Op. Att’y

The pre -2006 version of the oath may suffice in this reg ard. SeePart 13 Iabove. T h e am ended ve r s i on of EL §9- 304 s t at es t hatan i ndi vi dual “may vot e byabs ent ee bal l ot exce pt t o t he ext entpr eempt ed under fede r al l aw

. ” A l t hough t hat l anguage w as t hought t o aut hor i ze “ on demand” abs ent ee vot i ng, t he r efe r ence t o vot i ng byabs ent ee ba l l ot m us t be i nt erpr et ed i n acc or dance w i t h t he const i t ut i onal m eani ng of
a b s e n te e v o tin g

. See Koshko v

. H ai ni ng , 398 M d. 404, 425- 28, 921 A

. 2d 171 ( 2007) ( C our t w oul d r ead i nt o gr andpar entvi s i ta t i on s t atut e a pr es um pt i on favor i n g p arent al deci s i ons i n or dert o s ave the stat u te f

rom inv ali d ati o n o n co n sti tuti o n al gro u n d s). T h e C o u rt of A ppeal s ’ opi ni on i n C a p o zz i r ej ect s t he propos i t i on t hat , undert he
c u rr e n t lan g u a g e o f

A rticle I, § 3 , the L e g isla tu re m a yp e rm it
a b se n tee v o tin g b yin d iv id u a ls w h o a re n e ith e r ab se n t n o r u n a b le to vot e i n per s on. T he C ap ozzi opi ni on i ndi cat es t hatthe amended
v e rsio n o f

th e sta tu te w o u ld g o b e y o n d th e c o n stitu tio n a l b o u n d s if itis co n stru ed to auth o ri ze ab sen tee b all o ts “o n d em an d

. ” H o w ev er, n eit h er C ap ozzi nor anyot hercour t deci s i on has over t ur ned t he
a m e n d e d v e rsio n o f

E L § 9 -3 0 4 . In o u r v iew , S B E m u st e f f e c tu a te t he l egi s l at i ve i nt entexpr es s ed i n t he 2006 amendm ent s w i t hi n t he
cons t i t ut i onal bounds i ndi cat ed i n C ap ozzi

. A n appr opr i at e w ayt o do t hi s w oul d be fort he abs ent ee ba l l ot for m s t o s etfo r t h t he pr er equi s i t e forabs ent ee vot i ng i n l anguage t hatm i r r or s t hatof A r t i cl e I , §3; i n t he oath, t he vot erw oul d cer t i fy t hathe ors he s at i s fi es t hatco n d it ion

. I n ot herw or ds , t he vot er sh o u ld sw e a r o r a f

f irm th a t th e v o ter w ill b e a b se n t o r w ill b e u n a b le t o v o t e i n p e r s o n o n e l e c t i o n d a y. 13
If th e p e n d in g c o n stitu tio n a l am e n d m e n t o f A rticle I, § 3 is
r at i fi ed i n 2008, anycons t i t ut i o n al conce r ns about“on demand”
a b se n tee v o tin g u n d e r E L § 9 -3 0 4 w ill b e re s o lv e d a n d th a t sta tu te m a yb e g iv e n th e f

u ll e f f e c t th a t w a s o ri g in a lly in te n d e d

. See 74 O pi ni ons of

t he At t or ney G ener al19, 32- 33 ( 1989) ( uncons t i t ut i onal sta tu te th a t is n o t re p e a led is m e re ly su sp e n d e d ; if b a sis f o r in v a lid ity i s r emoved, i t becomes ful l yeff ect i ve) ; 1A Si ng er, St atut es and St atut or y C ons t r uct i on §22: 4 ( 6 ed. r ev. 20 0 2 ) ( uncons t i t ut i onal th sta tu te m a yb e v a lid a ted b y c o n stitu tio n a l a m e n d m e n t). S B E c o u ld t hen re ver t t o t he cur r ent for m of oat h for abs ent ee bal l ot s or us e any ot herfor m cons i s t entw i t h E L §9- 304 or anyappl i cabl e s t atut e.Ge n. 80] 91
If th e p ro p o se d c o n stitu ti o n a l am e n d m e n t is n o t ra tifie d in 2008, w e r ecomm end t hat t he L egi s l atur e r evi s i t E L §9- 304 i n l i ght of C ap ozzi

.

III
C oncl usi on
F o r th e re a so n s s ta ted a b o v e , the a b se n tee b a llo t o a th sh o u ld t r ack t he l anguage of A r t i cl e I , §3 – t hati s , t he vot ers houl d be
r equi r ed t o s w ea r o r a ff ir m t hathe ors he w i l l be abs entor w i l l be
u n a b le to v o te in p e rso n o n e lec tio n d a y
. If a n a m e n d m e n t o f

A rticle I , §3 pas s ed by t he G ener al A s s embl y at i t s 2007 s es s i on i s r at i fi ed byt he vot er s , t he abse nt ee bal l ot for m s s houl d be am ended t o t r ack th e a m e n d e d p ro v isio n o r a n yleg isla tio n g o v e rn in g a b se n tee b a llo ts cons i s t entw i t h t hatpr ovi s i on.
D ougl as F. G ans l er A t t or ney G ener al
M a rk J. D a v is A ss i s t ant A tt o rn eyG ener

al
R o b e rt N . M c D o n a ld C hi ef C ouns el O pi ni ons and A dvi ce