HTTP 404 Not Found

OSU Navigation Bar

Election Law @ Moritz Home Page

Election Law @ Moritz

Election Law @ Moritz


Litigation

 

Ohio A. Philip Randolph Institute and NEOCH v. Husted

Case Information

Date Filed: April 6, 2016
State: Ohio
Issues: Voter Eligibility, Voter Supression
Current Court: U.S. Supreme Court (Case 16-980)

Issue:

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.

Status:

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. Respondents' Brief filed 3/31/17. Petitioners' Reply filed 4/17/17. District Court Order Granting Joint Motion for Further Relief filed 4/24/17. Order Granting Petition for Writ of Certiorari filed 5/30/17. Petitioners' Merit Brief filed 7/31/17. DOJ amicus brief filed 8/7/17.

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.

District Court Documents

6th Circuit Court of Appeals Documents

 

U.S. Supreme Court Documents

 

In the News

Edward B. Foley

Symposium: Wechsler, history and gerrymandering

A post written by Professor Edward Foley was published on SCOTUSblog.

“When we look back on the half-century since Sullivan, we see a legacy in which the Supreme Court itself contributed to America’s growth as a people committed to political freedom. Sullivan is entrenched as precedent precisely because it is now indelibly part of our national self-understanding," Foley writes. "For Gill to be successful like Sullivan, it too will need to become woven into our sense of America as a democracy. The way for Gill to accomplish this is to declare: 'Although the original Gerry-mander was never tested in this Court, the attack on its validity has carried the day in the court of history.' If the court says this, then 50 years from now—thanks in large part to Gill itself—we may have matured into the genuinely representative democracy we are still striving to be.”
 

more EL@M in the news...

Info & Analysis

U.S. Supreme Court to Hear Wisconsin Gerrymandering Case

On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to consider a gerrymandering case involving Wisconsin state legislative districts. The court also granted a request by the state to temporarily block the lower court\'s decision until the appeal is resolved. The case is Gill v. Whitford.

more info & analysis...