Last Updated: February 1, 2012 at 1:38 PM
League of Women Voters of Illinois v. Quinn
Case Information
Date Filed: September 9, 2011
State: Illinois
Issue: Redistricting
Courts that Heard this Case: U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois (Case 1:11-cv-05569)
Issue:
Whether Illinois' redistricting plan violates the First Amendment Guarentee of free expression.
Status:
Complaint filed 9/01/11.
District Court Documents
- Complaint
(filed 9/01/11) - First Amended Complaint (filed 9/01/11)
- Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (filed 9/08/11)
- Memorandum in Support of Motion to Dismiss (filed 9/08/11)
- Plaintiff's Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss (filed 9/23/11)
- Reply in Support of Motion to Dismiss (filed 9/30/11)
- Order Granting Motion to Dismiss (filed 10/28/11)
- Judgment Entered (filed 10/28/11)
- Motion to Reconsider (filed 11/10/11)
- Motion to Reconsider Denied (11/16/11)
- Notice of Appeal (filed 11/28/11)
- Transmission of Appeal (filed 12/06/11)
Supreme Court Documents
- Statement of Jurisdiction (filed 1/27/12)
In the News
EXCLUSIVE: Voter fraud, or just errors?
Professor Dan Tokaji was quoted in a Cincinnati Enquirer article about whether citizens who cast two ballots in elections have committed voter fraud. Some citizens under investigation say they were confused about the process or worried their original votes, often sent via absentee ballot, wouldn't count. Tokaji said there is often a valid reason someone would cast an absentee ballot and then a provisional one at a voting location.
“It’s certainly not a crime or intentional double voting,” he said. “Officials are not supposed to count provisional ballots if an absentee ballot has been cast.”
Submitting both “doesn’t come close to voting fraud,” he said. “The burden is on the board of elections to make sure two votes don’t count.”
Info & Analysis
Ohio House Committee Recommends Upholding Landis' Election Victory
Yesterday, an Ohio House of Representatives committee recommended 5-4 that the Ohio House uphold the election victory of Republican State Representative Al Landis over Democratic challenger Josh O'Farrell. In February, the Ohio Supreme Court sent the O'Farrell v. Landis record to the House for consideration. According to an article in the Canton Repository, committee chairman and State Representative Matt Huffman said he expects a vote by the full House later this month.
Major Pending Cases
- Applewhite v. Pennsylvania
- Arcia v. Detzner
- Arizona v. The Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, Inc.
- Banfield v. Aichele
- Brown v. Detzner
- Bryanton v. Johnson
- Citizen Center v. Gessler
- Davis v. Perry
- Fair Elections Ohio, Brunner v. Husted
- Fair Elections Ohio, The Amos Project, et al v. Husted
- Favors v. Cuomo
- Fitrakis v. Husted (state court)
- Frank v. Walker
- Gill v. IRS
- Gusciora v. Christie
- Jones v. Deininger
- Judicial Watch, Inc. v. Husted
- League of Women Voters of Wisconsin v. Walker
- LULAC v. Harris County
- McCutcheon v. FEC
- Mi Familia Vota Education Fund v. Detzner
- Milwaukee Branch of the NAACP v. Walker
- NEOCH v. Husted
- O'Farrell v. Landis
- Obama for America v. Husted
- Perez v. Texas
- Scott v. Schedler
- SEIU v. Husted
- Shelby County, Alabama v. Holder
- South Carolina v. United States
- Texas v. Holder
- Texas v. United States
- Townley v. Miller
- Voting for America v. Andrade
- Wagner v. Federal Election Commission
Commentary
Silence of the Lambs
Dale A. Oesterle
With the election of 2012 now well over and past the second inauguration of the incumbent President, the historical analysis of the events has begun and will last as long as written human history lasts. An interesting tidbit may already be lost to the majesty of the moment.
The voters of three very different states, Alaska, New Hampshire, and Ohio, all had an opportunity to call state constitutional conventions. In each state the voters turned the opportunity down by very similar votes, 68%, 64% and 68% respectively against.
more commentary...