OSU Navigation Bar

Election Law @ Moritz Home Page

Election Law @ Moritz

Election Law @ Moritz


Information & Analysis

Federal judge keeps Ohio provisional ballot case

Federal judge Algenon Marbley decided today to keep State of Ohio ex rel. Skaggs v. Brunner in federal court, apparently agreeing with Secretary Brunner that the issues presented in the case are intertwined with the issues ruled on by the court just before the election in NEOCH v. Blackwell.  In NEOCH, the court adopted Secretary Brunner's directive 2008-101 on the processing of provisional ballots as an order of the court.  A subsequent directive issued Oct. 28, 2008-103, reiterated the court's order that poll worker error may not invalidate a provisional ballot.  Specifically the court said that poll worker error including "failure of a poll worker to sign a provisional ballot" and "failure to comply with duties mandated by R.C. 3505.181, which governs the procedure for casting a provisional ballot" should not cause an eligible elector's ballot to be rejected.  At issue in Skaggs is whether the lack of a voter's name and signature on the ballot envelope should be cause for rejecting a provisional ballot.  The ballots under consideration could determine the outcome of the OH-15 House race.  Judge Marbley is holding a hearing today on whether to issue a temporary order delaying the counting of provisional ballots in Franklin County.

Commentary

Donald B. Tobin

FAQ on social welfare organizations

Donald B. Tobin

The Frank E. and Virginia H. Bazler Designated Professor in Business Law and a senior fellow at Election Law @ Moritz explains the nuances of social welfare organizations and federal regulations related to them.

more commentary...

In the News

Donald B. Tobin

How Did The IRS Get The Job Of Vetting Political Activity?

Professor Donald Tobin was interviewed by the Boston NPR station on its show Here & Now about the Internal Revenue Service's investigation into groups classified as social welfare organizations (marked by the 501(c)(4) tax classification). The IRS was in search of groups that are not focusing primarly on the social welfare of the country, but have a strong political advocacy facet. Political advocacy groups might want to be classified as 501(c)(4) organizations because under that classification they do not have to disclose their donors.

"The key is if you going to be engaged in candidate-type advocacy, and if you're going to intervene in elections and engage in election advocacy, we want disclosure of who your donors are," Tobin said.

“What groups are trying to do here is avoid having to disclose,” Tobin continued. “By earning the classification of social welfare, they’re avoiding the campaign disclosure that’s required for political organizations. So that’s really the underpinning of why we have this mess of the IRS having to get in and investigate and figure out whether an organization is political or not.”

more EL@M in the news...

Info & Analysis

Ohio House Committee Recommends Upholding Landis' Election Victory

Yesterday, an Ohio House of Representatives committee recommended 5-4 that the Ohio House uphold the election victory of Republican State Representative Al Landis over Democratic challenger Josh O'Farrell. In February, the Ohio Supreme Court sent the O'Farrell v. Landis record to the House for consideration. According to an article in the Canton Repository, committee chairman and State Representative Matt Huffman said he expects a vote by the full House later this month.

more info & analysis...