Major Pending Election Cases
This is a list of pending election law litigation cases that Election Law at Moritz is currently monitoring.
Stein v. CortesCase Page - last updated on January 13, 2017 (6:10 PM)
The plaintiff brings this action in relation to the difficulty they are facing in gaining a recount in Pennsylvania. The following claims are brought by plaintiff:
1. Whether the Defendants have are maintaining and implementing a system of voting that denies Pennsylvania voters the right to vote, which has severely burdened voters right to vote in violation of the Equal Protection clause.
2. Whether the Defendants are maintaining and implementing a system that burdens the right to vote and violates Due Process under the Fourteenth Amendment.
3. Whether the Defendants are maintaining and implementing a system that burdens the right to vote and violates the First Amendment.
Complaint filed 12/5/2016. Motion to Intervene by Trump et al filed 12/5/16. Order setting 12/6/16 deadline for response to Motion to Intervene. Motion for Expedited Hearing on Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed 12/6/16. Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed 12/6/16. Responses in Opposition filed by Trump et al and Cortes12/8/16. Opinion and Order Denying Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed 12/12/16.
North Carolina State Conference of the NAACP v. The North Carolina State Board of ElectionsCase Page - last updated on March 13, 2017 (11:05 AM)
Whether the North Carolina and County Boards of Elections cancellation of the voter registrations of thousands of North Carolina voters, based on a single piece of undeliverable mail, in the final weeks and months before Election Day violates that National Voter Registration Act and other federal laws.
Complaint filed 10/31/16. Order granting preliminary injunction filed 11/4/16. Answer of NC Board of Elections filed 12/22/16. Answers and Motions to Dismiss of County Defendants filed 1/26/17. NC Board of Elections' Opposition to Motions to Dismiss filed 2/16/17.
Florida Democratic Party v. DetznerCase Page - last updated on February 15, 2017 (3:44 PM)
Whether Florida's enforcement of statutes (Fla. Stat. § 98.077, Fla. Stat. § 101.65, and Fla. Stat. § 101.68) requiring the signatures on vote-by-mail ballots (formerly "absentee" ballots) to match the signature shown on registration records and the subsequent rejection of defective ballots, without a means to cure the defect, violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Complaint filed 10/3/16. Emergency Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed 10/3/16. Defendant's Memorandum in Opposition and Motion to Dismiss filed 10/14/16. Plaintiffs' Reply filed 10/16/16. Order granting preliminary injunction filed 10/16/16. Answer filed 10/31/16. Ordering staying case until 5-5-17 filed 12/12/16.
Common Cause v. RuchoCase Page - last updated on March 6, 2017 (6:13 PM)
Whether North Carolina's 2016 Congressional Redistricting Plan violates:
(1) the First Amendment;
(2) the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment
(3) the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment
(4) Article I, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution because representatives would allegedly not be chosen by "the people of the several states" but in effect by the majority party of the state legislature; and
(5) Article I, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution regarding state legislatures' authority to prescribe the times, places, and manner of holding elections.
Complaint filed 8/5/16. Time to file answer extended to 10/31/16. Answer filed 3/3/17. Opinion and Order denying motion to dismiss filed 3/3/17.
Feldman v. ArizonaCase Page - last updated on January 20, 2017 (6:20 PM)
Whether Arizona's allegedly insufficient number of polling places disenfranchised voters in violation of the Equal Protection Clause, the First Amendment, and section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.
Whether an Arizona law prohibiting individuals from collecting the early ballots of others (aka "ballot harvesting") violates the Voting Rights Act. the Fourteenth Amendment, and the First Amendment because it disproportionately and adversely impacts minorities, unjustifiably burdens the right to vote, and interferes with freedom of association.
Complaint filed 4/15/16. Amended complaint filed 4/19/16. Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed 6/10/16. Motion to Dismiss filed 6/17/16. Joint Notice of Settlement Agreement as to polling place allocation issue filed 9/9/16. Order Denying Motion for Preliminary Injunction as to HB 2023 (limiting "ballot harvesting") filed 9/23/16. Notice of Interlocutory Appeal filed 9/23/16. Emergency Stay Motion filed in District Court 9/28/16. Order Denying Stay filed 10/4/16. Emergency Motion for Injunction filed in Ninth Circuit 10/4/16. Order Denying Emergency Motion for Injunction filed 10/11/16. Parties' opening briefs at Ninth Circuit filed 10/17/16. Opinion and Order Affirming District Court on "ballot harvesting" issue filed 10/28/16. Opinion and Order Affirming District Court on wrong precinct voting issue filed 11/2/16. Order Denying Injunction pending appeal on wrong precinct voting issue filed 11/4/16. En Banc Opinion and Order granting injunction against Arizona "ballot harvesting" law pending appeal filed 11/4/16. Emergency Application for Stay of Ninth Circuit Injunction filed 11/4/16. U.S. Supreme Court Order granting stay of Ninth Circuit injunction filed 11/5/16. Ninth Circuit En Banc Oral Argument scheduled for 1/17/17. Parties' supplemental briefs on mootness issue filed 12/5/16. Order rescheduling oral argument for June 2017 filed 12/13/16. Second Amended Complaint filed 12/28/16. Defendant and Intervenors motions to dismiss complaint filed 1/17/17.
Ohio A. Philip Randolph Institute and NEOCH v. HustedCase Page - last updated on February 16, 2017 (5:36 PM)
Whether the removal of eligible voters from Ohio’s voter-registration rolls, as a result of those voters’ decisions not to participate in recent elections, violates the roll-maintenance provisions of the National Voter Registration Act and has caused eligible Ohio citizens to be deprived of the right to vote.
Complaint 04/06/2016. Answer filed 4/28/16. Amended complaint filed 5/17/16. Defendant's merit brief filed 5/24/16. Plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment and motion for permanent or temporary injunction filed 5/24/16. Order denying Plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment and permanent or temporary injunction, and entering judgment for defendant filed 6/29/16. Appellants' brief at 6th Circuit filed 7/13/16. Appellee's brief filed 7/20/16. 6th Circuit Opinion Reversing District Court filed 9/23/16. District Court Opinion and Order implementing remedies consistent with Sixth Circuit Opinion filed 10/19/16. Petition for Writ of Certiorari filed 2/13/17.
Disclosure: EL@M Senior Fellow Daniel Tokaji is involved in this case as one of the cooperating attorneys for the ACLU of Ohio. No EL@M member who participates in any lawsuit covered on the EL@M website is involved in generating the website's information or analysis on that lawsuit.
Fish v. KobachCase Page - last updated on February 1, 2017 (10:37 AM)
Whether Kansas has violated the NVRA’s accessible registration system by requiring that Kansans who attempt to register to vote while applying for or renewing a driver’s license produce documents like a birth certificate or U.S. passport in order to become registered.
Complaint filed 2/18/16. Motion for preliminary injunction filed 2/26/16. Memorandum and Order regarding preliminary injunction filed 5/17/16. Notice of Appeal filed 6/15/16. Memorandum and Order Denying Motion to Certify Class filed 7/29/16. Appellants' brief in 10th Circuit filed 7/1/16. Appellees' brief filed 7/21/16. Oral Argument held at 10th Circuit 8/23/16. Order and Judgment Affirming District Court filed 9/30/16 (full opinion forthcoming). Opinion Affirming District Court filed 10/19/16. Plaintiffs' Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on remand filed 12/22/16.
League of Women Voters v. NewbyCase Page - last updated on March 20, 2017 (11:09 PM)
Whether the EAC unlawfully permitted certain states to modify the national uniform mail-in voter registration form by requiring documentary proof of citizenship.
Complaint and Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction filed 02/12/16. Answer filed 4/22/16. Opinion denying motion for preliminary injunction filed 6/29/16. Notice of Appeal filed 7/1/16. Appellants' Brief and Joint Appendix filed 7/18/16. Motion for summary judgment filed in District Court 7/22/16. Federal Appellees' Brief filed 7/27/16. Kobach's Appellee Brief filed 8/3/16. Per Curiam Judgment and Order Reversing District Court filed 9/9/16. District Court opinion and order remanding case to EAC filed 2/24/17.
Common Cause v. KempCase Page - last updated on March 20, 2017 (5:14 PM)
Whether a Georgia statute authorizing the removal of voters from registration lists after a period of inactivity violates the First Amendment and the National Voter Registration Act.
Complaint filed 2/10/16. Motion to Dismiss filed 3/4/16. DOJ Statement of Interest filed 5/4/16. Order granting motion to dismiss filed 3/17/17.
Hindel v. HustedCase Page - last updated on March 20, 2017 (11:01 PM)
Whether Ohio is violating the Americans with Disabilities Act by allegedly not providing equal opportunity for blind voters to vote absentee and access the Ohio Secretary of State's voter services website.
Complaint filed 12/7/15. Motion for preliminary injunction filed 12/7/15. Answer filed 2/5/16. Motion for judgment on the pleadings filed 2/5/16. Plaintiffs' response in opposition filed 2/29/16. Motion for permanent injunction filed 4/816. Defendant's memorandum in opposition to motion for permanent injunction filed 4/25/16. Opinion and order granting defendant's motion for judgment on the pleadings filed 5/11/16. Motion for reconsideration filed 7/7/16. Joint motion for status conference filed 10/6/16. Motion for Permanent Injunction filed 11/16/16. Husted Response in Opposition to Motion for Permanent Injunction filed 12/7/16. Opinion and Order Granting in Part Plaintiffs' Motion for Permanent Injunction filed 2/1/17. Motion for Attorney Fees filed 2/24/17. Notice of Appeal filed 2/24/17.
Whitford v. NicholCase Page - last updated on February 28, 2017 (4:57 PM)
Whether Wisconsin's redistricting plan violates the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment, the First Amendment right to freedom of association, and plaintiffs' civil rights under 42 U.S.C. 1982 and 1988.
Complaint filed 7/8/15. Opinion and Order denying defendants' motion to dismiss filed 12/17/15. Opinion and Order denying defendants' motion for summary judgment filed 4/7/16. Trial briefs filed 5/16/16. Post-trial briefs filed 6/10/16. Opinion finding Assembly Districts unconstitutionally drawn filed 11/21/16. Briefs on Remedies filed 12/21/16. Opinion and Order on Remedy filed 1/27/17. Notice of Appeal to U.S. Supreme Court filed 2/24/17.
One Wisconsin Institute v. ThomsenCase Page - last updated on January 20, 2017 (6:17 PM)
Whether several Wisconsin statutes (Act 23, Act 240, Act 76, Act 177, Act 75, Act 227, Wis. Stat. §§ 6.855-.86, Wis. Stat. § 5.02, Wis. Stat. § 6.34, Wis. Stat. § 6.79, and Wis. Stat. § 6.97) are in violation of: Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, the First Amendment, the Fifteenth Amendment, the Twenty-Sixth Amendment, and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Counts are as follows.
Count I: Violations of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act
Count II: Undue Burdens on the Right to Vote in Violation of the First Amendment and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment
Count III: Disparate Treatment of Voters without a Rational Basis in Violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment
Count IV: Partisan Fencing in Violation of the First Amendment and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment
Count V: Abridgment or Denial of the Right to Vote on the Basis of Race in Violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and Fifteenth Amendment
Count VI: Abridgment or Denial of the Right to Vote on the Basis of Age in Violation of the Twenty-Sixth Amendment
Complaint filed on 5/29/15. Amended complaint filed 6/22/16. Answer filed 7/22/15. Motion to Dismiss filed 7/22/15. Opinion and Order on Defendants' Motion to Dismiss filed 12/17/15. Motion for summary judgment filed by defendants 1/11/16. Second amended complaint filed 3/25/16. Trial beginning May 16. District Court's Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law filed 7/29/16. Motion to Stay filed 8/3/16. Notice of Appeal filed 8/3/16. Petition for Initial En Banc Review filed 8/3/16. Motion to Expedite filed 8/3/16. District Court Order denying stay in substantial part filed 8/11/16. Emergency Motion to Stay filed in Seventh Circuit 8/12/16. 7th Circuit Order Denying Initial En Banc Hearing filed 8/26/16. Appellants' Brief and Appendix filed 9/12/16. Status Report on Efforts to Inform Public filed 9/22/16. District Court Opinion and Order Granting Plaintiffs' Remedy in Part 10/13/16. Appellees' Brief in Seventh Circuit filed 10/21/16. Final Appendix filed 12/7/16. Oral Argument scheduled for 1/17/17. Oral Argument rescheduled for 2/24/17.
Bethune-Hill v. Virginia State Board of ElectionsCase Page - last updated on March 1, 2017 (3:33 PM)
Whether Virginia's 2012 congressional redistricting plan constitutes unconstitutional racial gerrymandering
District Court Opinion issued 10/22/15. Appellants' brief filed 9/7/16. Appellees' brief filed 10/17/16. Appellants' Reply filed 11/16/16. Supreme Court opinion issued 3/1/17.
Benisek v. LamoneCase Page - last updated on February 22, 2017 (9:41 PM)
Whether a single-judge district court can conclude that a three-judge panel is not required to hear a 28 U.S.C. § 2284 complaint, not because it is insubstantial, but because the complaint fails to state a claim under Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, as determined by the court.
US District Court for the District of Maryland Opinion filed on 04/08/2014.
US Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit Opinion filed on 10/07/2014.
US Supreme Court Granted Petition for Writ of Cert on 06/08/2015.
Oral Argument held on 11/04/15.
U.S. Supreme Court Opinion filed 12/8/15.
Second Amended Complaint on remand filed 3/3/16. Motion to Dismiss filed 4/20/16. Opinion and Order Denying Motion to Dismiss filed 8/24/16. Answer to Amended Complaint filed 9/7/16.
North Carolina v. North Carolina NAACPCase Page - last updated on March 13, 2017 (10:49 AM)
Do the provisions of HB 589 (Voter ID requirements) violate Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act (42 U.S.C. 1973) and the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments of the Constitution?
Fourth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals opinion reversing District Court filed 7/29/16. Motion for Stay filed 8/3/16. Order Denying Stay filed 8/4/16. Emergency Stay Application filed with U.S. Supreme Court 8/15/16. Responses filed 8/25/16. Order Denying Stay filed 8/31/16. Emergency Motion to Enforce Injunction filed in District Court 10/1/16. Order denying Motion to Enforce Injunction filed 10/13/16. Order Denying Motion for Injunction Pending Appeal filed 10/19/16. Motion to Voluntarily Dismiss Appeal 11/1/16. Petition for Writ of Certiorari filed in U.S. Supreme Court 12/27/16. Response to Petition filed 1/19/17. Reply of North Carolina filed 2/13/17. Reply of North Carolina AG filed 3/9/17. Private Respondents' Motion to Add NC General Assembly as Petitioner filed 3/9/17.
Related cases: League of Women Voters of North Carolina v. Howard and United States v. North Carolina.
Veasey v. AbbottCase Page - last updated on February 28, 2017 (5:15 PM)
Does SB 14 violate Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. 1973, by denying the right to vote on account of race and language minority?
Does SB 14 violate the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution by purposely denying minority voters equal protection for registration and voting?
Does SB 14 violate the Fifteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution by purposely denying minority voters the right to vote?
Does SB 14 severely burden or facially discriminate against a class of voters without a legitimate governmental interest and violate the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution?
Does SB 14 restrict freedom of speech and association in violation of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution?
Does SB 14 create a poll tax in violation of the Fourteenth and Twenty-First Amendments of the U.S. Constitution?
District Court opinion striking down voter ID law filed 10/9/14. Fifth Circuit Opinion filed 8/5/15. Petition for Rehearing En Banc filed 8/28/15. Application to Vacate Fifth Circuit Stay filed in U.S. Supreme Court 3/25/16. Order Denying Application to Vacate Stay filed 4/29/16. Fifth Circuit En Banc Opinion filed 7/20/16. Consent Motion in District Court for Entry of Temporary Remedial Order filed 7/23/16. Order Granting Consent Motion filed 7/23/16. Joint submission of agreed terms filed 8/3/16. Order Regarding Agreed Interim Plan filed 8/10/16. U.S.'s and Private Plaintiffs' Motions to Enforce Interim Remedial Order filed 9/6/16 and 9/7/16. Response to Motions to Enforce Interim Remedial Order filed 9/12/16. Order Granting Motion to Enforce Interim Remedial Order filed 9/20/16. Parties' Proposed Findings of Fact filed 11/18/16. Responses to Proposed Findings of Fact filed 12/16/16. U.S. motion to voluntarily withdraw discriminatory purpose claim filed 2/27/17.
True the Vote, Inc. v. IRSCase Page - last updated on March 20, 2017 (11:13 PM)
1) Whether True the Vote is exempt from Federal Income tax as a 501(c)(3) organization.
2) Whether the IRS violated True the Vote's First Amendment right of freedom of speech and association.
3) Whether the IRS overstepped its statutory authority in requesting additional information from True the Vote.
Complaint filed 5/21/13. Motion to Dismiss counts 1, 2, 3, and 5 filed 9/26/13. Plaintiff's motion to stay agency action filed 11/15/13. True the Vote's Opposition to Motion to Dismiss on 11/26/13. Multiple Replies Supporting Motion to Dismiss on 12/17/13. Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction and Expedited Discovery filed 6/30/14. Order denying Motion for Discovery and Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed 8/7/14. Order granting Motion to Dismiss filed 10/22/14. Plaintiff's Notice of Appeal filed 12/18/14. Order that appeal be held in abeyance filed 5/8/15. Oral argument at D.C. Circuit held 4/14/16. D.C. Circuit Court opinion affirming in part, reversing in part, filed 8/5/16. U.S.'s Answer to First Amended Complaint filed 12/19/16. True the Vote's Memo in Opposition to U.S.'s Motion for Summary Judgment filed 1/19/17.
Alabama Democratic Conference v. AlabamaCase Page - last updated on January 20, 2017 (6:06 PM)
Whether Alabama’s effort to redraw the lines of each majority-black district to have the same black population as it would have using 2010 census data as applied to the former district lines, when combined with the state's new goal of significantly reducing population deviation among districts, amounted to an unconstitutional racial quota and racial gerrymandering that is subject to strict scrutiny and that was not justified by the putative interest of complying with the non-retrogression aspect of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act; and whether these plaintiffs have standing to bring such a constitutional claim.
Appellees' Motion to Dismiss or Affirm filed in U.S. Supreme Court 4/21/14. Appellants' Reply filed 5/5/14. Appellees' Brief filed 10/9/14. Appellants' Reply Brief filed 10/28/14. U.S. Supreme Court Opinion filed 3/25/15. Judgment filed 4/27/15. District Court order denying summary judgment filed 4/28/15. Plaintiffs' post-remand brief filed 6/12/15. Defendants' post-remand brief filed 7/24/15. Order for plaintiffs to file new statewide redistricting plan 8/28/15. Defendants' Notice of Supplemental Authority (U.S. Supreme Court case of Harris v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission) filed 4/22/16. District Court opinion on remand striking down 12 Alabama districts as unconstitutional gerrymanders filed 1/20/17.
Frank v. WalkerCase Page - last updated on January 20, 2017 (6:11 PM)
Whether Wisconsin voter ID legislation is unconstitutional as applied to certain classes of eligible Wisconsin voters; more specifically, whether the legislation unduly burdens the fundamental right to vote under the Equal Protection Clause, violates the Twenty-Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments as an unconstitutional poll tax, and violates the Equal Proection Clause in arbitrarily refusing to accept certain identification documents.
District Court Opinion and Order issued 10/19/2015. Appellants' Briefs on appeal in 7th Circuit filed 12/28/15. Appellee's brief in 7th Circuit filed 1/26/16. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals opinion reversing District Court filed 4/12/16. District Court decision and order on remand in favor of plaintiffs filed 7/19/16. District Court Order Denying Stay Pending Appeal filed 7/29/16. 7th Circuit Order Granting Stay Pending Resolution of Appeal filed 8/10/16. Emergency Petition for Rehearing filed 8/11/16. 7th Circuit Order Denying Motion for Reconsideration filed 8/15/16. 7th Circuit Order Denying Initial En Banc Hearing filed 8/26/16. Appellants' Brief and Appendix filed 8/31/16. Appellees' Brief and Short Appendix filed 9/30/16. Oral Argument rescheduled for 2/24/17.
Perez v. AbbottCase Page - last updated on March 13, 2017 (9:32 AM)
Whether Texas' redistricting plan violates the Constitution because it does not make a good faith effort to maintain population equality and treats inmates as residents of the counties in which they are incarcerated.
Motion for Preliminary Injunction by Debbie Allen et al filed 10/14/15. Order denying preliminary injunction filed 11/16/15. Order for supplemental briefing in light of Harris v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission filed 4/20/16. Non-U.S. Plaintiffs' Joint Motion for Entry of Judgment filed 12/30/16. Order denying motion for entry of judgment filed 1/5/17. Opinion finding some Congressional districts unlawfully drawn filed 3/10/17. Findings of Fact filed 3/10/17.
NEOCH v. HustedCase Page - last updated on March 20, 2017 (11:06 PM)
Original Issues: (1) Whether Ohio's voter ID laws are unconstitutional as "confusing, vague, and impossible to apply" in violation of the right to vote; whether the laws are unconstitutional because they apply only to in-person voters and not to absentee voters; whether they are unconstitutional because they may bar voters who do not have required identification from voting on Election Day; whether they are unconstitutional because only some forms of ID must have current address; whether they are unconstitutional as a poll tax. (2) Whether Ohio's provisional-ballot laws are unconstitutionally vague and therefore violate Equal Protection and Due Process.
Subsequent Issue: Whether an April 2010 Consent Decree requiring that provisional ballots improperly voted as a result of poll worker error still be counted is valid under Ohio law.
Current Issue: Whether Ohio SB 205 and 216 unlawfully discriminate against minority voters and unconstitutionally burden the right to vote.
Plaintiffs' and Defendants' trial briefs filed 3/10/16. Trial at District Court held March 2016. Parties' proposed findings of fact filed 4/28/16. Defendants' post-trial brief filed 5/5/16. Plaintiffs' response to defendants' proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law filed 5/5/16. Opinion enjoining enforcement of Ohio statutes filed 6/7/16. 6th Circuit Opinion affirming District Court's attorney fee award (with some exceptions) filed 8/1/16. Opinion reversing District Court on most of plaintiffs' claims filed 9/13/16. Order denying rehearing en banc filed 10/6/16. Emergency Application to Stay Sixth Circuit Mandate filed in U.S. Supreme Court 10/25/16. Response in Opposition filed 10/28/16. Order Denying Emergency Application for Stay filed 10/31/16.
Related Case: SEIU v. Husted
Disclosure: EL@M Senior Fellow Daniel Tokaji is one of the attorneys representing amici League of Women Voters of Ohio and Common Cause of Ohio in this case. No EL@M member who participates in any lawsuit covered on the EL@M website is involved in generating the website's information or analysis on that lawsuit.
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.