OSU Navigation Bar

Election Law @ Moritz Home Page

Election Law @ Moritz

Election Law @ Moritz


Litigation

 

League of Women Voters of North Carolina v. Howard

Case Information

Date Filed: August 12, 2013
State: North Carolina
Issues: Voter ID, Voting Rights Act, Voter Supression
Courts that Heard this Case: Middle District of North Carolina (Case 1:13-cv-00660 ); United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit (Case 16-1468 and 16-1529); United States Supreme Court (Case 14A358)

Issue:

1. Does the reduction in early voting days, loss of same-day registration, and elimination of out of precinct provisional voting opportunities violate the Fourteenth Amendment?

2. Did the Generally Assembly have a discriminatory purpose, which would violate the Fourteenth Amendment, in passing H.B. 589?

3. Do the limits on early voting days, same day registration, and out of precinct provisional voting violate Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act (42 U.S.C. 1973)?

4. If the Court finds discrimination against African Americans, should North Carolina be covered under Section 3(c) of the Voting Rights Act?

Status:

Trial on photo identification requirement held beginning 1/25/16. Opinion upholding voter ID law issued 4/25/16. Notice of Appeal filed 5/6/16. Appellants' brief filed 5/19/16. Brief of U.S. as appellant filed 5/19/16. Court of Appeals order extending District Court's stay filed 6/7/16. Appellees' brief filed 6/9/16. Oral Argument held 6/21/16. Fourth Circuit Decision Reversing District Court filed 7/29/16. Motion for Stay filed 8/3/16. Order Denying Stay filed 8/4/16. Emergency Stay Application filed with U.S. Supreme Court 8/15/16. See North Carolina NAACP v. McCrory for filings.

See related cases: North Carolina NAACP v. McCrory and United States v. North Carolina

District Court Documents

Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals Documents

U.S. Supreme Court Documents

U.S. Supreme Court Documents (second stay application)

 

 

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...