Last Updated: May 21, 2012 at 4:31 PM
League of Women Voters of Illinois v. Quinn
Case Information
Date Filed: September 1, 2011
State: Illinois
Issue: Redistricting
Current Court: Supreme Court of the United States (Case 11-943)
Issue:
Whether Illinois' redistricting plan violates the First Amendment guarantee 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)
- Letter Informing of Appeals Docket Number (filed 1/27/12)
Supreme Court Documents
- Statement of
Jurisdiction (filed 1/27/12)
- Motion to Affirm filed by Governor Pat Quinn (filed 4/19/12)
- Reply (filed 4/30/12)
- Summary Affirmance (5/21/12)
PDF files in this site require
Commentary
Provisional Ballots, Consent Decrees, and the Balance Between the Federal and State Governments
Owen Wolfe
A recent mandamus action filed by the Ohio Senate President and House Speaker Pro Tempore to require the Ohio Secretary of State to rescind directives issued in response to a consent decree issued in a federal case dealing with counting provisional ballots raises questions about the mechanics of state election law, the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, the relationship between federal and state courts, the law of consent decrees, and more. I have attempted in this article to grapple with these issues in a fair and unbiased manner. Given the complexity of this problem, however, these matters are open to a variety of interpretations and this is just one approach. I hope, however, that this article can provide a useful starting point for a discussion about the future of provisional voting in Ohio and in the nation at large.
This paper is a first look by a student member of the Election Law @ Moritz team and reflects one possible perspective on the issue. Stay tuned, as more analysis from the team will follow as the litigation develops. Owen Wolfe is affiliated with the Ohio Democratic Party and the Obama ’12 campaign, but is not in any way associated with any litigation team working on this case. EL@M has posted the document because we believe it has public value and adds to the discourse on this topic.
more commentary...