OSU Navigation Bar

Election Law @ Moritz Home Page

Election Law @ Moritz

Election Law @ Moritz


Litigation

 

Frank v. Walker

Case Information

Date Filed: December 13, 2011
State: Wisconsin
Issue: Voter ID
Current Court: United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin (Case 2:11-cv-01128)

Issue:

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.

Status:

Complaint filed 12/13/11. Motion for Preliminary Injunction and Motion for Class Certification filed 4/23/12. Trial postponed until Spring 2013. Trial held in November 2013. Post hearing briefs due 12/20/13. Defendant Post-Trial Brief filed 12/22/13. Plaintiff's Amended Post-Trial Brief filed 1/16/14. Decision and Order striking down voter ID law filed 4/29/14. Notice of Appeal filed 5/12/14. Appellants' Brief filed 6/23/14. Appellees' Frank Brief filed 7/23/14. LULAC's Brief filed 7/23/14. Frank Appellees' Brief filed 7/23/14. 7th Circuit order granting stay filed 9/12/14. Emergency Petition for Rehearing filed 9/16/14. Appellant's Response to Petition for Rehearing filed 9/23/14. Order denying Motion for Rehearing filed 9/26/14. Opinions issued 9/30/14. Emergency Application to Vacate Stay filed with SCOTUS 10/2/14. Opinion reversing District Court filed 10/6/14. Memorandum in opposition to SCOTUS emergency application filed 10/6/14. Emergency Application to Stay Seventh Circuit Order filed 10/8/14. SCOTUS order granting application to vacate stay filed 10/9/14. 7th Circuit Opinion on Request to Rehear En Banc filed 10/10/14. Petition for Writ of Certiorari filed 1/7/15. Respondent's Brief filed 2/6/15. Petitioner's Reply filed 2/24/15. Denial of Writ of Certiorari filed 3/23/15. Order denying Motion to Extend Stay filed 3/25/15. Mandate filed 3/25/15.

 

Appeal consolidated with LULAC v. Deininger for purposes of briefing and disposition.

See related Wisconsin voter ID cases: LULAC v. Deininger, League of Women Voters of Wisconsin v. Walker, and Milwaukee Branch of the NAACP v. Walker

 

U.S. Supreme Court Documents

District Court Documents

Circuit Court of Appeals Documents

U.S. Supreme Court Documents

Related News

 

Commentary

In the News

David  Stebenne

Can Kasich win all 88 Ohio counties?

Professor David Stebenne was quoted in an Ohio Watchdog article about the possibility of Governor John Kasich winning all 88 Ohio counties in his re-election bid.

“It’s really hard to do,” he said. “As popular as the governor is and as weak as his opponent is, I doubt he’ll carry all 88 (counties).”

Stebenne said Ohio has some unusual counties, which tend to be really Democratic or really Republican.

He said a good example was the election of 1956, when President Dwight Eisenhower carried 87 of 88 Ohio counties.

“He lost one of the Appalachian counties — a poor county where the residents tend to vote Democratic no matter what,” Stebenne said. “There was even some humorous discussion in the Oval Office about that one county.”

Glenn and Voinovich were “the two most popular candidates in modern history,” he added, “and they each only did it once. While Kasich is popular, he really doesn’t have the broad appeal that these two did.”

Stebenne said that both Voinovich and Kasich come from communities that tend to be more Democratic in voter registration, but that Kasich’s first race for governor was more divisive than the races for Voinovich.

“Voinovich had electoral success in Cleveland and as governor because he was able to persuade Democrats to vote Republican,” he said. “Glenn had national appeal across party lines.”

more EL@M in the news...

Info & Analysis

New Ohio Voting Case Filed

Several plaintiffs recently filed a complaint in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, alleging that voting laws enacted by Ohio's Republican-controlled General Assembly since November 2012 violate various federal constitutional provisions as well as the Voting Rights Act. According to the complaint, the General Assembly has enacted laws that burden all Ohio voters but that were designed to and will disproportionately burden specific populations, particularly African-Americans, Latinos, and young people.

more info & analysis...