OSU Navigation Bar

Election Law @ Moritz Home Page

Election Law @ Moritz

Election Law @ Moritz


State ex rel. Mahal v. Brunner

Case Information

Date Filed / Ended: October 17, 2008 / October 21, 2008
State: Ohio
Issues: State Voter Registration Databases, Voter Registration
Courts that Heard this Case: Ohio Supreme Court (Case 2008-2027); U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio (Case 2:08-cv-00983)


The plaintiff, a registered Republican, is asking the Ohio Supreme Court in mandamus to order Jennifer Brunner to share HAVA mismatches with county BOE's in a user-friendly way that allows them to investigate mismatches.  Plaintiff is also  asking the court to require BOE's to look at this information and consider it in evaluating whether to count absentee ballots.


Complaint filed 10/17/08 in the Ohio Supreme Court.  Notice of Removal filed on 10/20/08 with federal district court.  The district court remanded the case back to the Ohio Supreme Court on 10/20/08.  Answer filed on 10/20 in Ohio SC.  Caused dismissed by the Ohio Supreme Court on 10/21/08.


Ohio Supreme Court Documents

  • Expedited Petition for Writ of Mandamus PDF (filed 10/18/08)
  • Briefing Entry PDF (filed 10/18/08)
  • Notice of recusal of Justice O'Connor, received by Clerk's Office (filed 10/20/08)
  • Notice of recusal of Justice Stratton, received by Clerk's Office (filed 10/20/08)
  • Briefing Entry PDF (entered 10/20/08)
  • Respondent Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner's notice of removal PDF (filed 10/20/08)
  • E-mail notification received by Clerk's Office regarding assignment of Judge Lynn Charles Slaby, Ninth District Court of Appeals, for Justice O'Connor
  • E-mail notification received by Clerk's Office regarding assignment of Judge William Herman Wolff, Jr., Second District Court of Appeals, for Justice Stratton
  • Answer of respondent PDF (filed 10/20/08)
  • Assignment of Judge Lynn Charles Slaby of the Ninth District Court of Appeals, effective October 20, 2008
  • Assignment of Judge William Herman Wolff, Jr. of the Second District Court of Appeals, effective October 20, 2008
  • Application for dismissal of case PDF (filed 10/21/08)
  • Cause dismissed PDF (filed 10/21/08)

U.S. District Court Documents

Related Articles


Edward B. Foley

The Constitution Needed a Judicial Assist

Edward B. Foley

“The majority contends that its counterintuitive reading of ‘the Legislature’ is necessary to advance the ‘animating principle’ of popular sovereignty.” With this sentence in his dissent (at page 14), Chief Justice Roberts gets to the heart of the debate in today’s 5-4 decision in the Arizona redistricting case.

more commentary...

In the News

David  Stebenne

Can Kasich win all 88 Ohio counties?

Professor David Stebenne was quoted in an Ohio Watchdog article about the possibility of Governor John Kasich winning all 88 Ohio counties in his re-election bid.

“It’s really hard to do,” he said. “As popular as the governor is and as weak as his opponent is, I doubt he’ll carry all 88 (counties).”

Stebenne said Ohio has some unusual counties, which tend to be really Democratic or really Republican.

He said a good example was the election of 1956, when President Dwight Eisenhower carried 87 of 88 Ohio counties.

“He lost one of the Appalachian counties — a poor county where the residents tend to vote Democratic no matter what,” Stebenne said. “There was even some humorous discussion in the Oval Office about that one county.”

Glenn and Voinovich were “the two most popular candidates in modern history,” he added, “and they each only did it once. While Kasich is popular, he really doesn’t have the broad appeal that these two did.”

Stebenne said that both Voinovich and Kasich come from communities that tend to be more Democratic in voter registration, but that Kasich’s first race for governor was more divisive than the races for Voinovich.

“Voinovich had electoral success in Cleveland and as governor because he was able to persuade Democrats to vote Republican,” he said. “Glenn had national appeal across party lines.”

more EL@M in the news...

Info & Analysis

Fifth Circuit Affirms that Texas Voter ID Law Violates Voting Rights Act

Today, a three-judge panel of the Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals issued its opinion in the Texas voter ID case of Veasey v. Abbott, affirming in part and reversing in part the District Court\'s decision. The Fifth Circuit disagreed that Texas\' voter ID law is a poll tax under the 14th and 24th Amendments. The Court also vacated the District Court\'s judgment that the law was passed with a racially discriminatory purpose, remanding the case for a determination using the proper legal standard and evidence. However, the Court agreed that the law violates Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act due to its discriminatory effect. The Fifth Circuit remanded the case for the District Court to determine the appropriate remedy.

more info & analysis...