Over the weekend, U.S. District Judge Mark Walker issued an order finding part of Florida\'s absentee voting law unconstitutional. In granting the plaintiffs\' motion for a preliminary injunction, Judge Walker determined that Florida\'s statutory scheme requiring automatic rejection of absentee ballots with signatures not matching those on file unlawfully disenfranchised voters. The case is Florida Democratic Party v. Detzner. This case follows another Florida case in which Judge Walker ordered the state to extend the voter registration deadline by a week in the aftermath of Hurricane Matthew. That case is Florida Democratic Party v. Scott.
On Friday, the 10th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals affirmed a District Court decision blocking a Kansas law that required proof of citizenship for voters registering while obtaining or renewing a driver\'s license. The 10th Circuit determined that the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) preempts Kansas\' requirement. A full opinion is forthcoming. The case is Fish v. Kobach.
In an opinion issued today, a three-judge panel of the Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled that Ohio\'s procedures for removing voters from registration rolls violates the National Voter Registration Act and the Help America Vote Act. The case is Ohio A. Philip Randolph Institute v. Husted.
In an order issued today, U.S. District Judge Douglas Rayes denied plaintiffs\' motion for a preliminary injunction that would have blocked an Arizona statute limiting the practice of \"ballot harvesting.\" The law limits whom a voter can give an early ballot to for delivery. The case is Feldman v. Arizona. Earlier this month, the parties reached a settlement agreement on another issue in the case regarding the allocation of polling places.
In an opinion released yesterday, the Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals reversed the District Court on most of the plaintiffs\' claims in an Ohio voting rights case. The Sixth Circuit determined that Ohio laws did not create an undue burden on the right to vote nor did they disparately impact minority voters in violation of the Voting Rights Act. The case is NEOCH v. Husted.
Election Law at Moritz is nonpartisan and does not endorse, support, or oppose any candidate, campaign, or party. Opinions expressed by individuals associated with Election Law at Moritz, either on this web site or in connection with conferences or other activities undertaken by the program, represent solely the views of the individuals offering the opinions and not the program itself. Election Law at Moritz institutionally does not represent any clients or participate in any litigation. Individuals affiliated with the program may in their own personal capacity participate in campaign or election activity, or engage in pro bono representation of clients other than partisan candidates or organizations.