OSU Navigation Bar

Election Law @ Moritz Home Page

Election Law @ Moritz

Election Law @ Moritz


Information & Analysis

Coleman seeks temporary injunction against commingling the 933

The Coleman v. Franken contest saw a new development today in Coleman's approach.  The Coleman campaign moved to stop redaction of tracking numbers on the 933 initially rejected absentee ballots that were counted in the state canvass after a second review by the counties.  State officials were nearly half finished with the redaction, however, when the filing was made.  See the motion here and memorandum of support here.  Coleman and Franken stipulated on Feb. 3 that these ballots were properly and lawfully included in the canvass and contestant Coleman agreed to dismiss all claims related to the 933.  This was 10 days before prior to the court's ruling last Friday which appears to require the exclusion of other absentee ballots that are similarly situated to some of the 933.  Coleman's side now says that some illegal ballots are being included while other illegal ballots are being excluded and says this is an Equal Protection violation.  The Franken campaign believes the court has disposed of such a claim already but, on Feb. 18, asked the court to clearly articulate its position on Coleman's Equal Protection claim.  After today's move by Coleman, Franken's side is suggesting "unspecified sanctions" against Coleman's legal team.  See the Star Tribune coverage here and MinnPost.com coverage hereUpdated 6:55 PM EST: Franken has filed a memo opposing the temporary injunction and, in it, requests that the court establish a hearing and briefing schedule for the Franken team to move for Rule 11 sanctions against Coleman's lawyers.  Franken also filed a new memo today on the requirements for offers of proof made by the Coleman team to preserve issues for appeal.

Commentary

Daniel P. Tokaji

What's the Matter with Kobach?

Daniel P. Tokaji

By "Kobach," I mean the Kobach v. EAC case in which the Tenth Circuit heard oral argument Monday – rather than its lead plaintiff, Kansas’ controversial Secretary of State Kris Kobach, who argued the position of his state and the State of Arizona. This post discusses what’s at issue in the case, where the district court went wrong, and what the Tenth Circuit should do.

more commentary...

In the News

Daniel P. Tokaji

Ohio treasurer receives OK to host town halls

Professor Daniel Tokaji was quoted in an article from the Associated Press about an attorney general opinion that allows the Ohio treasurer to conduct telephone town halls using public money. The opinion will likely have broad ramifications for the upcoming elections, Tokaji said.

“As a practical matter, while that legal advice is certainly right, very serious concerns can arise about whether these are really intended to inform Ohio constituents about the operations of his office or if they’re campaign events,” he said.

more EL@M in the news...

Info & Analysis

Judge Denies Motion for Preliminary Injunction in NC Case

U.S. District Judge Thomas D. Schroeder denied the motion for a preliminary injunction sought by the plaintiffs in a case challenging a new North Carolina voting law as violating the Voting Rights Act and the federal Constitution. Judge Schroeder also denied the defendants' motion for judgment on the pleadings. The case is North Carolina NAACP v. McCrory.

more info & analysis...