Last Updated: January 26, 2012 at 12:47 PM
Conservative Party of New York State, et al., v. New York State Board of Elections, et al.
Case Information
Date Filed: September 14, 2010
State: New York
Issues: Voting Technology, Vote Dillution
Courts that Heard this Case: U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (Case 1:10-cv-06923)
Issue:
Whether New York's policy of, when a voter selects the same candidate multiple times under multiple party affiliations, counting only the vote for the first party selected, and thus depriving the second party of credit for receiving a vote on their party, without notice to the voter, is unconstitutional.
Status:
Consent Decree Dismissing Case entered 9/8/11. Oral Argument Held on Motion to Dismiss 1/31/11. Plaintiff's Supplemental Memorandum of Law on Motion to Dismiss First Amended Complaint filed 2/3/11. Order Denying Motion to Dismiss entered 2/10/11. Civil Case Management Plan entered 3/1/11. Order Referring Case to Magistrate Judge for Settlement entered 4/7/11. Order and Opinion Denying Defendant's Motion to Dismiss 5/10/11. Consent Decree Dismiss Case filed (9/08/11)
District Court Documents
- Complaint
(filed 9/14/10) - Motion for Preliminary Injunction (filed 10/1/10)
- Memorandum in Opposition to Motion for Preliminary Injunction (filed 10/8/10)
- Reply Memorandum in Support of Preliminary Injunction (filed 10/14/10)
- Defendant's Motion to Dismiss (filed 11/8/10)
- Notice of Voluntary Dismissal of Defendant (filed 11/22/10)
- Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Motion to Dismiss (filed 11/23/10)
- Reply Memorandum of Law on Motion to Dismiss (filed 12/1/10)
- First Amended Complaint (filed 12/20/10)
- Transcript of proceedings held before Judge Jed S. Rakoff (entered 1/6/11)
- Motion to Dismiss First Amended Complaint (filed 1/10/11)
- Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Motion to Dismiss First Amended Complaint (filed 1/18/11)
- Reply Memorandum in Support of Motion to Dismiss First Amended Complaint (filed 1/24/11)
- Oral Argument Held 1/31/11
- Plaintiff's Supplemental Memorandum of Law on Motion to Dismiss First Amended Complaint (filed 2/3/11)
- Order Denying Motion to Dismiss [Explanatory Memorandum to Follow] (entered 2/10/11)
- Answer to Amended Complaint (filed 2/18/11)
- Civil Case Management Plan (entered 3/1/11)
- Order Referring Case to Magistrate Judge for Settlement (entered 4/7/11)
- Letter Requesting Rescheduling of Settlement Conference (filed 4/25/11)
- Order and Opinion Denying Motion to Dismiss (entered 5/10/11)
- Consent Decree Dismissing Case (filed 9/08/11)
PDF files in this site require
Commentary
Provisional Ballots, Consent Decrees, and the Balance Between the Federal and State Governments
Owen Wolfe
A recent mandamus action filed by the Ohio Senate President and House Speaker Pro Tempore to require the Ohio Secretary of State to rescind directives issued in response to a consent decree issued in a federal case dealing with counting provisional ballots raises questions about the mechanics of state election law, the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, the relationship between federal and state courts, the law of consent decrees, and more. I have attempted in this article to grapple with these issues in a fair and unbiased manner. Given the complexity of this problem, however, these matters are open to a variety of interpretations and this is just one approach. I hope, however, that this article can provide a useful starting point for a discussion about the future of provisional voting in Ohio and in the nation at large.
This paper is a first look by a student member of the Election Law @ Moritz team and reflects one possible perspective on the issue. Stay tuned, as more analysis from the team will follow as the litigation develops. Owen Wolfe is affiliated with the Ohio Democratic Party and the Obama ’12 campaign, but is not in any way associated with any litigation team working on this case. EL@M has posted the document because we believe it has public value and adds to the discourse on this topic.
more commentary...