OSU Navigation Bar

Election Law @ Moritz Home Page

Election Law @ Moritz

Election Law @ Moritz


Litigation

Harkless v. Blackwell

Case Information

Date Filed / Ended: September 21, 2006 / February 3, 2009
State: Ohio
Issue: Voter Registration
Courts that Heard this Case: U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio (Case 1:06-cv-02284-PAG); U.S. Court of Appeals, 6th Circuit (Case 07-3829)

Issue:

Whether Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell and other state officials have violated the National Voter Registration Act by failing to make voter registration applications available at certain social service agencies.

Status:

Motion to Dismiss Granted 12/28/06. Motion for Reconsideration of Opinion filed 1/12/07.  Appeal filed 6/6/07.    Opinion Reversing and Remanding entered on 10/28/08.  Motion to extend time to file petition for rehearing en banc filed 11/7/08.  Motion granted 11/14/08.

Court of Appeals Documents

  • BRIEFING LETTER SENT setting briefing schedule: appellant brief due 8/7/07 ; appellee brief due 9/10/07 ; reply brief due 9/27/07; appendix due 10/4/07 ; all final briefs due 10/25/07 (entered 6/28/07)
  • Briefing Letter Sent by CONFERENCE ATTORNEY'S OFFICE resetting briefing schedule: appellant brief now due 8/21/07 ; appellee brief due 9/24/07; reply due 10/11/07; joint appendix due 10/18/07; all finals due 11/8/07 (entered 7/9/07)
  • Statement of Issues (filed 7/12/07) [not available].
  • Briefing Letter Sent by CONFERENCE ATTORNEY'S OFFICE resetting briefing schedule: appellant brief now due 9/24/07 ; appellee brief now due 10/29/07 ; reply brief now due 11/15/07; appendix now due 11/26/07 ; all final briefs now due 12/17/07 (entered 8/7/07)
  • BRIEFING LETTER SENT resetting briefing schedule: appellant brief now due 10/26/2007. appellee brief now due 12/10/2007. joint appendix now due 01/04/2008. final appellant brief now due 01/24/2008. final appellee brief now due 01/24/2008 (entered 10/11/07)
  • APPELLANT PROOF BRIEF (filed 10/29/07) [not available]
  • AMICUS BRIEF filed by Mr. Dirk C. Phillips PDF (filed 11/7/07)
  • APPELLEE PROOF BRIEF (filed 12/12/07) [not available]
  • Appellant MOTION to extend time to file brief (filed 1/14/08) [not available]
  • LETTER SENT granting motion to extend time to file brief (entered 1/16/08) [not available]
  • PROOF REPLY BRIEF filed by Appellants (filed 1/22/08)
  • APPELLEE PROOF BRIEF (filed 2/1/08)
  • APPELLEE FINAL BRIEF (filed 2/5/08)
  • APPELLEE FINAL BRIEF (filed 2/19/08)
  • FINAL REPLY BRIEF PDF (filed 2/19/08)
  • Oral argument date set for 9:00 a.m. June 12, 2008 PDF (4/11/08)
  • Oral argument acknowledgement filed by Attorney Mr. Henry G. Appel for Appellee Helen E. Jones-Kelley . [07-3829, 07-4165] (filed 4/22/08)
  • Oral argument acknowledgement filed by Attorney Mr. Neil A. Steiner for Appellants Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, Tameca Mardis and Carrie Harkless. [07-3829, 07-4165] (filed 4/22/08)
  • Oral argument acknowledgement filed by Attorney Mr. Michael D. Meuti for Appellee Jennifer Brunner. [07-3829, 07-4165] (filed 4/22/08)
  • CAUSE ARGUED by Mr. Neil A. Steiner for Appellants Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now. (filed 6/12/08)
  • OPINION filed: REVERSED and REMANDED PDF (entered 10/28/08)
  • JUDGMENT: REVERSED and REMANDED PDF (enterd 10/28/08)
  • MOTION to extend time to file petition for rehearing en banc PDF (filed 11/7/08)
  • RULING granting motion to extend time to 11/25/2008 to file a petition for rehearing en banc PDF(entered 11/14/08)
  • MANDATE ISSUED PDF(entered 2/3/09)

District Court Documents

In the News

Edward B. Foley

Gerrymandering Is Headed Back to the Supreme Court

Professor Edward Foley was requoted in Mother Jones about a gerrymandering case in Wisconsin on its way to the Supreme Court. Other legal actions on partisan gerrymandering in Maryland and in North Carolina may be bound for the Supreme Court as well.

While previous Supreme Court cases have noted that partisan gerrymanders are “incompatible with democratic principles,” The New York Times originally reported, the court has never officially struck a case down. While it remains unseen how the Supreme Court will rule in the upcoming cases, a 2004 ruling from a previous gerrymandering case could play a pivotal role in how the court stands in the future. 

“The ordered working of our Republic, and of the democratic process, depends on a sense of decorum and restraint in all branches of government, and in the citizenry itself,” Justice Anthony M. Kennedy wrote in 2004. Kennedy’s statement is “the most important line” in the decision, Foley told The New York Times, adding,  “He’s going to look at what’s going on in North Carolina as the complete absence of that. I think that helps the plaintiffs in any of these cases.”


 

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...