OSU Navigation Bar

Election Law @ Moritz Home Page

Election Law @ Moritz

Election Law @ Moritz


Litigation

 

Libertarian Party of Ohio v. Husted

Case Information

Date Filed: September 25, 2013
State: Ohio
Issue: Ballot Access
Courts that Heard this Case: Southern District of Ohio (Case 2:13-CV-00953); United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit (Case 14-03030); United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit (Case 14-3230); United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit (Case 16-3537)

Issue:

Issue 1:

Does Secretary Husted's enforcement of residency requirements for circulators of candidates' nominating petitions  violate the First Amendment?

Issue 2:

Does Secretary Husted's enforcement of residency requirements for circulators of candidates' nominating petitions, as applied,  violate the First Amendment?

Status:

Opinion and Order Granting Summary Judgment to Defendant issued 3/16/15. Opinion and Order finding Ohio minor party ballot access law constitutional filed 10/16/15. Motion for Summary Judgment as to Count 7 by Defendant Husted on 10/30/15. Opinion and order on discovery issues filed 2/5/16. Opinion and order granting summary judgment to defendant filed 5/20/16. Notice of Appeal filed 5/20/16. Appellant's brief filed 6/21/16. State's Appellee brief filed 7/7/16. Gregory Felsoci's Appellee brief filed 7/7/16. Appellant's reply brief filed 7/11/16. Opinion and Judgment affirming District Court filed 7/29/16. Motion to Stay Judgment filed 8/1/16. 6th Circuit Order Denying Motion for Stay filed 8/22/16. Application for Stay and Emergency Injunction filed in U.S. Supreme Court 8/23/16. Order Denying Stay filed 8/29/16.

District Court Documents

Court of Appeals Documents

Court of Appeals Documents (as to denial of TRO)

 

Court of Appeals Documents (Third Appeal)

 

Court of Appeals Documents (Subsequent Appeal)

 

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...